Profit Sharing vs 401(k): Plan Design Tradeoffs for Mid-Market Companies
Profit sharing versus 401(k) plan design presents tradeoffs for mid-market companies, so understanding each option helps employers choose the right retirement benefit.
Published
October 13, 2025
Category
401(k)
Learn more
For HR and Finance leaders at mid-sized employers, choosing the right retirement plan is pivotal to both workforce engagement and organizational competitiveness. According to a 2022 study, 89% of mid-sized companies offer a 401(k) or similar retirement plan, highlighting just how central these benefits have become in the modern workplace (investmentnews.com). Employer-sponsored plans aren’t just a checkbox, they’re a core part of talent attraction and retention: more than 60% of small and mid-sized business leaders cite attracting or retaining talent as their primary reason for offering 401(k)s (upcity.com).
Platforms like Basic Capital help mid-sized employers navigate these choices, supporting informed decisions that align plan design with both business goals and employee needs. As you evaluate your options, understanding the tradeoffs between Profit Sharing vs 401(k) and the nuances of 401(k) Plan Design for Mid-Sized Employers is essential.
Profit Sharing and 401(k): What Each Plan Excels At
Retirement plan selection isn’t just about compliance—it’s about flexibility, predictability, and how each plan serves your workforce.
Profit Sharing Plans offer employers the flexibility to decide each year how much to contribute, depending on performance or profitability. This makes them especially attractive for businesses with variable earnings, since contributions aren’t required annually and can be allocated based on company results.
Contributions are subject to annual IRS limits, which in 2023 cap total contributions at $66,000 per employee (irs.gov).
Discretionary Contributions: Employers can set profit-sharing amounts each year, or skip them entirely when business is tight.
Employer-Funded: Employees don’t contribute directly; all funding comes from the employer.
Allocation Flexibility: Contributions can be distributed using pro rata, flat dollar, or new comparability formulas.
Vesting Schedules: Employers can use cliff or graded vesting to incentivize retention. Eligibility rules, such as minimum age or service, also add plan design flexibility.
401(k) Plans allow employees to defer salary into individual accounts, often with employer matching. These plans provide predictable, ongoing savings opportunities and are highly valued by employees.
Employee Contribution: Employees control their deferral amounts, often up to annual IRS limits.
Employer Match: Most mid-sized companies match a percentage of employee contributions, such as 50% of the first 6% of salary.
Automatic Enrollment: Under the SECURE 2.0 Act, automatic enrollment generally becomes mandatory for new plans starting in 2025, helping boost participation rates.
Predictable Benefits: Regular contributions and matching foster consistent long-term saving.
Catherine Collinson, CEO of Transamerica Institute, notes: “Employer-sponsored retirement plans, including 401(k)s and similar plans, have proven to be the most effective way to facilitate long-term savings among workers” (investmentnews.com).
For a deeper look at plan design flexibility and how it can shape your retirement benefits, see our guide to the best 401(k) providers for mid-sized companies.
When to Combine Profit Sharing and 401(k): The Hybrid Advantage
It’s a common question for employers: Is there value in offering both profit sharing and a 401(k) plan? For many, a hybrid approach offers the best of both worlds: predictability for employees and flexibility for employers.
Combining plans allows employees to save through salary deferrals and receive additional, discretionary profit-sharing contributions. While specific data on how many employers offer both plans is limited, it’s increasingly common for mid-sized companies to layer profit sharing on top of a core 401(k) plan to enhance their value proposition. In practice, more than 60% of SMB leaders cited attracting or retaining talent as their primary reason for offering 401(k) plans (upcity.com).
Employers should also confirm that all hybrid plan structures meet ERISA, IRS, and DOL compliance requirements.
A recent case study of a manufacturing firm adopting both approaches saw increases in plan participation and employee satisfaction within the first year. This hybrid structure let the company adjust annual profit-sharing based on financial results while providing employees with steady, predictable 401(k) savings.
For more on how mid-sized employers evaluate hybrid retirement plan designs, visit our resource on provider evaluation.
Governance and Administration: What Mid-Sized Employers Need to Know
Profit Sharing Plans | 401(k) Plans | |
|---|---|---|
Compliance | Subject to ERISA, IRS limits, nondiscrimination testing, annual Form 5500 filing | Same as profit sharing; also requires annual nondiscrimination testing, new SECURE 2.0 auto-enroll rules |
Administrative Cost | Perceived as high, but cost-effective options exist (many overestimate annual costs >$10,000) | Similar costs, with automatic enrollment, escalators, and recordkeeping requirements |
Employer Burden | Discretionary funding can vary admin work year to year | Ongoing contributions and compliance create steady admin needs. Key tasks include annual nondiscrimination testing, filing Form 5500, and maintaining up-to-date plan documents and records. |
Common Pitfalls | Late filings, failed testing, poor employee communication | Same pitfalls; plus automatic enrollment compliance for new plans in 2025 |
The SECURE 2.0 Act generally requires automatic enrollment for new 401(k) plans beginning with the 2025 plan year, which will require careful administration and clear employee communication (irs.gov). Research indicates that many small and mid-sized employers overestimate plan costs and administrative burdens, sometimes to their own detriment (pew.org).
It's important to understand fiduciary duties and avoid common compliance mistakes, like late filings or failed nondiscrimination testing.
For more on compliance requirements and plan fees, see our guide to 401(k) plan costs.
Decision Checklist: Aligning Plan Design with Company Goals
When selecting or redesigning your plan, keep these points top-of-mind:
Understand the real administrative costs and compliance requirements before ruling out a plan design.
Many mid-sized employers overestimate costs, which can prevent them from adopting plans that would otherwise benefit both the company and employees (pew.org). Best practice is to regularly review plan features, communicate clearly with employees, and consider hybrid structures that maximize both flexibility and savings.
Automatic enrollment and escalation are now industry standards, and the SECURE 2.0 Act will require these features for many new plans beginning with the 2025 plan year (irs.gov). For a full checklist on plan design decisions, see our comparison guide to top 401(k) providers.
Leveraging plan administration software can simplify compliance and record-keeping, further reducing administrative burden.
Communicating Plan Design: Explaining the Why to Your Team
Rolling out a new plan or plan change? Here’s how to make sure employees understand and value their benefits:
Start with Clarity: Clearly explain what’s changing, why, and how it benefits employees.
Leverage Employee Education: Studies show that employee education and automatic enrollment significantly boost participation rates; the SECURE 2.0 Act generally mandates auto-enrollment for new plans starting in 2025, which is expected to increase participation even further (irs.gov).
Provide Written Materials: Make plan summaries, FAQs, and contact information easy to access.
Encourage Questions: Open channels for employees to ask about contributions, vesting, and investment options.
Monitor Participation: Track engagement to spot gaps and target further communication.
Consider integrating financial wellness programs to increase overall engagement and plan participation.
For practical tips on employee education and why it matters, visit our guide to 401(k) advantages for employers.
Next Steps: Building a Flexible, Compliant Retirement Plan
Too often, mid-sized employers focus on perceived cost or complexity and miss the opportunity to create a truly competitive retirement benefit.
Key takeaway: Aligning plan design with business goals, workforce needs, and regulatory requirements can unlock both employer flexibility and employee engagement.
With new regulations like the SECURE 2.0 Act and growing employee expectations, now is the time to review your options and update your approach to retirement benefits.
To discuss how to get started with a compliant, flexible retirement plan, get started with Basic Capital.
References
Department of Labor. (n.d.). Meeting Your Fiduciary Responsibilities. https://www.dol.gov/node/66869
World Advisors. (2024). 10 Best Practices For Conducting a 401(k) Provider RFP. https://worldadvisors.com/blog/employer/10-best-practices-for-conducting-a-401k-provider-rfp
CFO.com. (2001). Eye on 401(k). https://www.cfo.com/news/eye-on-401k/683517/
Rixtrema. (2018). 7 Exclusive Case Studies on 401(k) Retirement Plans for Financial Advisors. https://rixtrema.com/blog/7-exclusive-case-studies-on-401k-retirement-plans-for-financial-advisors/
U.S. Department of Labor. (2024). Retirement Security Final Rule – Definition of an Investment Advice Fiduciary (Fact Sheet). https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ebsa/about-ebsa/our-activities/resource-center/fact-sheets/retirement-security-rule-and-amendments-to-class-pte-for-investment-advice-fiduciaries
Inland Counties Legal Services. (2023). Request for Proposal for 401(k) Savings Plan Audit Services. https://www.inlandlegal.org/icls-in-action/request-for-proposal-for-401k-savings-plan-audit-services/
