Back to Federal guidance
Diversification of a plan invested entirely in fixed income
Summary A trust asked whether putting all its assets in diversified fixed-income securities met ERISA's diversification requirement. DOL declined to rule on the portfolio's factual risk and said the broader legal question awaited regulations. It quoted legislative history on looking through to the ultimate investments, but did not approve the trust's proposed portfolio.
Document
Federal opinion letter
Agency
U.S. Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA)
Document number
P/OPINION 76-70
Date issued
June 10, 1976
Status
Unknown
EBSA's index does not mark withdrawn or superseded opinions; still posted on dol.gov as of 2026-10-26.
Status last verified October 26, 2026
Topics
Apply this to your situation
This page explains the general guidance. Ask about your specific situation and see what current federal labor law says, with citations.
About this page: The full text below is the official document from U.S. Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA). Ezel adds the plain-English summary and tracks the document's status. The official source linked on this page is authoritative for any reliance.
P/OPINION 76-70
404
June 10, 1976
Dear :
This is in reply to your letter of April 2, 1976, addressed to , requesting a ruling of the Department that the investment of 100% of the above-referenced trust's assets in diversified fixed income securities is a diversification of plan assets within the meaning of section 404(a)(1)(C) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA).
With respect to that portion of your letter which may be factual in nature (i.e., whether the particular investments are diversified so as to minimize the risk of losses), the policy of the Department is not to issue rulings as to matters of an inherently factual nature, such as investment quality of securities or classes of securities.
With respect to the legal issue raised in your letter (whether a plan's portfolio may be deemed to be diversified within the meaning of section 404(a)(1)(C) of ERISA if 100% of its assets is invested in diversified fixed income securities) this issue is of a nature that cannot be resolved prior to the issuance of regulations, and we therefore are unable to issue any ruling with respect thereto.
However, you may wish to consider, for your general information, the following material from page 305 of the Conference Report accompanying ERISA (H.R. Rep. No. 93-1280, 93d Cong., 2d Sess. ( 1974)):
The conferees intend that, in general, whether the plan assets are sufficiently diversified is to be determined by examining the ultimate investment of the plan assets . . . . a plan may be invested wholly in insurance or annuity contracts without violating the diversification rules, since generally an insurance company's assets are to be invested in a diversified manner.
It is our understanding that, due in part to restrictions on investments in common stock and real estate for production of income imposed by state statutes (see, e.g., section 81 of the New York Insurance Law), insurance companies have traditionally held over 70% of their assets in fixed income securities. See Huebner & Black, Life Insurance, 8th ed., pp. 712-713 (Prentice-Hall 1972).
Sincerely,
What does federal law require in your situation?
Ezel checks current federal labor law against your facts and answers with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace