Skip to content
  • Facebook
  • X (formerly Twitter)
  • Linked In
  • I’m a Client
  • Portal Login
  • Home
  • About RSG
  • Services
    • Plan Advisory and Co-Fiduciary Services
    • Plan Consulting
    • Third Party Administration (TPA)
    • Our Process
  • Knowledge Library
  • Contact
  • Home
  • About RSG
  • Services
    • Plan Advisory and Co-Fiduciary Services
    • Plan Consulting
    • Third Party Administration (TPA)
    • Our Process
  • Knowledge Library
  • Contact
RSG | Retirement Solution Group

RSG | Retirement Solution Group

Why Consider CITs For Your Employees.

Written by: Scott Emering

Categories: Plan Advisory and Co-Fiduciary Services | Plan Consulting

If it walks like a mutual fund and talks like a mutual fund, why should I consider CITs for my company’s retirement plan menu of investment options?  Solid question. In this article we examine the similarities as well as points of distinction that a plan sponsor may consider when choosing between a Collective Investment Trust (CIT) and a mutual fund.

Larger plans in the $1B+ market have been using Collective Investment Trusts (“CIT”) for years.   But over the last 10 years or so, their adoption in the mid- and small-size plan market has grown exponentially.  In fact, as of 2017, CITs held over $3T in qualified retirement plan assets.  For a number of reasons, this trend is expected to continue.  As a result, it’s important for plan sponsors of all sizes to understand the pros and cons of these investments and if they make sense for the Plan and its participants. Let’s begin with the basics.

What is a CIT?

A CIT is a specialized investment vehicle structured much like a mutual fund that is only available to qualified plans.  At the end of the day, it is a direct contract with the investment provider and end user client, thus not available to the general public.  They are typically sponsored and maintained by a bank or trust company.  The assets are overseen by a separate trustee who acts as an ERISA 3(38) fiduciary to the trust.

What is driving their broader adoption?

The major driver of CIT adoption is related to the recent focus on fiduciary responsibility and resulting trends of fee transparency and compression.  For example, CITs can usually offer similar investment objectives of a mutual fund (passive and active), risk-based allocation fund, or target retirement date allocation fund but at much lower costs to the Plan and its participants.

There are many reasons why CITs are typically lower cost.  But a few big ones are:

  • taxation
  • reduced marketing and distribution costs,
  • less regulatory requirements
  • less overhead (in general)

As a fiduciary it can create an interesting situation and prompt a closer look.  If the tracking error, performance analytics and risk measurements look similar to a mutual fund and I can get an equal investment at a lower cost, it may be worth considering the CIT alternative.

In addition, improvements have been made to streamline the contracting process and increase the transparency of performance reporting and benchmarking.  CITs now offer daily pricing and quarterly fact sheets while Morningstar offers CIT peer group benchmarking.

Is there a downside?

There are still a few hurdles to broader adoption of CITs, mostly around ongoing due diligence.  Because the CIT is a contract between the Plan and the trust, there is separate contracting paperwork that should be reviewed by the Plan Sponsor and their attorney. 

The larger concern for most Plans and advisors is the increased complexity of fund due diligence.  Unlike mutual funds, CITs are not regulated by the SEC and not required to produce monthly performance statistics, prospectus, or other investment details.  They do not have “tickers”. When compared to the mutual fund equivalent, the due diligence reports may lack history, may be incomplete or have gaps caused by the CIT. In addition, performance data is not typically shared with widely used third party fund monitoring software, like FI360.

Other challenges may be portability and participant communication and education.  For anyone who researches the investment via the general internet or third-party sites, there is a lack of information.  The statements and return sheets will often not show historical performance.  And, if the sponsor wishes to move the Plan to a new recordkeeper/401(k) provider, they may or may not be able to take on the CIT solutions in the Plan.  Technology has come a long way here, but unique challenges remain in this market.

As CITs continue to improve in these areas, we expect their adoption in qualified plans will continue to grow. With that, the RSG team has seen and dealt with CITs, proving to be a valuable resource to help our clients make this critical decision.   Each business is unique.  There is no set answer.  

Have Questions?

We have answers. Whether you're an existing client or just need to get some expert advice, we'd love to hear from you.

Let's Connect

Name
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Post navigation

<<< Previous Article
Next Article >>>

More Like This

SECURE 2.0 Update: Looking Ahead

The SECURE 2.0 Act introduces several important changes affecting 401(k) plans, starting in 2025. Plan sponsors should prepare for these updates to ensure compliance and optimize their retirement plans.
Read More

Secure Act 2.0

Secure Act 2.0 is coming as part of the Infrastructure Bill of 2021. This article highlights a few proposed changes including Roth IRA, an increase in RMD and more. The Secure Act 2.0 builds on the Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement Act of 2019. Included in the bill are dozens of provisions aimed at boosting retirement security.
Read More

Leadership’s Role in Benchmarking Retirement and Health Insurance Benefits

Leadership plays a critical role in benchmarking retirement and health insurance benefits to stay competitive, compliant, and cost-effective. Learn how benchmarking helps employers align with industry standards, fulfill fiduciary responsibilities under ERISA, and improve employee satisfaction. By regularly reviewing benefit plans and comparing them with peers, companies can reduce costs, improve plan quality, and attract and retain top talent. The article also outlines practical steps leaders can take to begin the benchmarking process effectively.
Read More
  • Home
  • Services
    • Plan Consulting
    • Plan Advisory and Co-Fiduciary Services
    • Third Party Administration (TPA)
  • Our Process
  • About RSG
  • Retirement Plan Specialists
  • Co-Fiduciary Managers
  • Client Resources
  • Knowledge Library
  • Webinars and Events
  • Contact

Sign Up for Our Mailing List

Name
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Built using the Harvest Theme by Two Row Studio | © 2025 by Retirement Solution Group. All Rights Reserved.