Supreme Court Signals Employees Must Use Direct Benchmarks to Challenge Retirement Fund Choices
The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in Anderson v. Intel Corp Investment Policy Committee on Oct. 6, 2026. Employees allege Intel’s fiduciaries breached their ERISA duty by investing retirement assets heavily in hedge funds and private equity, resulting in poor returns.
Justices repeatedly used a fruit metaphor, insisting that plaintiffs must compare the challenged fund to a comparable “apple” rather than an unrelated “orange.” Justice Kagan said the case needs “another apple,” while Justice Gorsuch stressed a “meaningful benchmark of some kind, apples, not oranges.”
Bench’s Core Concern: Lack of Direct Benchmark
The Court focused on the complaint’s failure to name specific funds with similar strategies that performed better. Without that side‑by‑side comparison, the justices indicated the claim is insufficient. The employees’ broader argument that hedge‑fund investments are inherently imprudent was deemed too vague.
- 1Identify comparable funds that use similar hedge‑fund strategies.
- 2Collect performance data showing those funds outperformed the plan.
- 3Document how the plan’s returns fall short of the benchmark.
- 4Consult an attorney to evaluate the strength of the claim.
Source: SCOTUSblog
Implications for Workers and Retirees
For ordinary workers, this means that future lawsuits over retirement‑plan performance will likely require concrete benchmark data—such as the returns of comparable funds that also use hedge funds. Simply alleging that a plan’s strategy is risky or that returns are low will not meet the Court’s standard.
Employees who believe their plan’s investments are underperforming should gather performance data on similar funds and be prepared to show how those funds outperformed the plan in question.
What Intel and Its Counsel Said
Intel’s representatives argued that the lower‑court’s decision was correct and that the plaintiffs had not met the required standard. Government lawyer Aimee Brown discussed with the justices what types of benchmarks might be acceptable, suggesting the Court has already decided a benchmark is necessary.
Next Steps and When to Seek Legal Help
Given the justices’ comments, the lower‑court ruling is expected to be affirmed, likely without a split decision. Workers who think they have a claim should consult an attorney promptly to assess whether they have the needed benchmark evidence before filing suit.
What this means: our conclusions
- RiskHigher hurdle for retirement‑fund claims
Workers will face a tougher standard, needing concrete benchmark data to succeed, which may deter many lawsuits.
- RiskIntel’s fiduciaries likely protected
If the Court affirms the lower court, Intel’s investment choices will remain unchallenged absent benchmark evidence.
- What to watchSignal to other employers
The decision could prompt companies to document benchmark comparisons for their retirement plans to avoid future litigation.
- What to doEmployees should gather data now
Anyone considering a claim should start collecting performance data on comparable funds to meet the Court’s benchmark requirement.
- What to watchPotential limit on class actions
The need for specific benchmarks may make large class actions over retirement‑plan performance harder to certify.
| Party | Position |
|---|---|
| Employees (plaintiffs) | Seek to block hedge‑fund investments without a direct benchmark |
| Intel fiduciaries (defendants) | Argue lower‑court ruling was correct; benchmark required |
| Justices | Require a comparable “apple” benchmark; likely to affirm lower court |
Source: SCOTUSblog
- Employee Retirement Income Security Act law.cornell.edu
Find a lawyer for this issue
Federal rules apply nationwide, but your options depend on your state and situation. Browse attorneys by practice area, then pick your state.
This article is general information based on SCOTUSblog and court or agency records available at publication time. It is not legal advice; laws and deadlines differ by state and by case. Published October 7, 2026.
Source: SCOTUSblog
Supreme Court Appears Skeptical of Employee Challenge Over Retirement Fund Choices
The U.S. Supreme Court signaled it will likely rule against employees who sued Intel over retirement fund investments in alternative assets like hedge funds.
Supreme Court to weigh employee claims of imprudent retirement fund investments
The Court will consider whether employees must show a benchmark to prove underperformance of Intel retirement plans under ERISA.