Original report published by Cointelegraph on November 7, 2026, at 04:04:27 UTC+8.
A proposed US Labor Department rule could make room for smaller cryptocurrencies in 401(k) retirement plans. But eligibility and actual inclusion are different questions: the proposal does not name permitted digital assets or impose a minimum market capitalization, while leaving plan managers responsible for justifying their investment choices.
According to Cointelegraph’s report, the rule reached the White House for final review on Thursday, as recorded by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. The Labor Department’s March proposal aims to make alternative investments, including crypto, easier to offer while providing greater legal protection for employers and retirement-plan managers. It does not guarantee that any cryptocurrency will be offered.
The test is suitability, not simply size
The proposal directs retirement-plan managers to consider six factors:
- Performance
- Fees
- Liquidity
- Valuation
- Benchmarks
- Complexity
Those criteria could present obstacles for smaller tokens with limited trading histories, thinner liquidity or other risks.
Teresa Goody Guillén, managing partner at Bellementis PLLC, said Bitcoin and Ether would likely be offered first because they have established markets and investment products. According to CoinGecko figures cited in the report, their market capitalizations were approximately $1.5 trillion and $273 billion, respectively, as of 20:01 UTC on November 6.
But Guillén said size alone should not determine suitability: “Big doesn’t mean suitable, and small doesn’t mean disqualified.” Her view was that digital assets should face the same standards of prudence, liquidity, valuation and investor protection as other retirement investments, without special treatment or exclusion based on their technology.
Bernardo Brites, co-founder and CEO of Trace Finance, offered a more restrictive assessment. In his view, Bitcoin clearly meets the criteria and Ether also passes, while other tokens fall short on track record or benchmarks before market capitalization becomes decisive.
“The practical test is simpler: can a plan committee document a daily, reliable price from a regulated wrapper?” Brites said. “If not, it is not going in.” That is his assessment of likely implementation, not an explicit restriction in the proposal.
Funds may arrive before direct holdings
The proposal does not restrict crypto exposure to exchange-traded funds or managed funds. Nevertheless, both experts expected those structures to precede direct holdings.
Guillén said ETFs and managed funds fit existing custody and recordkeeping systems. Direct cryptocurrency holdings would introduce additional questions around storage, cybersecurity and pricing, though she said those risks should not automatically disqualify them.
Brites expected a gradual rollout, beginning with existing brokerage options, followed by standalone ETFs and funds with small crypto allocations. He forecast some crypto investment options in 2027, ETFs at larger employers later that year, and broader availability in retirement funds by 2028. These were forecasts, not confirmed launch dates.
“The rule changes the legal risk, not the plumbing, and the plumbing is slower,” he said. He added that White House review could take up to 90 days, followed by publication and an effective date typically 60 days later.
Legal protection would not eliminate legal risk
Brites cautioned that the proposal would give plan managers some protection from lawsuits, not immunity from challenges to their investment decisions.
He also pointed to the possibility of reversal by a future administration, noting that guidance issued in 2022 was reversed in 2025. Employers designing long-term retirement plans would have to weigh that uncertainty. With courts giving less deference to agencies, he said, the weight that the proposed safe harbor would carry in litigation also remained unsettled.
For the retirement-access narrative, the distinction is important: a rule that permits consideration of crypto is not evidence that employers have selected it. The proposal could widen the range of assets under consideration, but the supplied report describes prospective access and expert expectations—not confirmed adoption by retirement plans.
