Updated 2026-03-30
Principal vs John Hancock 401(k) Comparison
Compare Principal Financial (#6, 8.3/10) and John Hancock (#10, 7.7/10) side by side across fees, ratings, features, and investment options.
Overall Comparison
| Feature | Principal | John Hancock |
|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 8.3/10 | 7.7/10 |
| Rank | #6 | #10 |
| AUM | $700 billion | $600 billion |
| Participants | 6 million | 3 million |
| Plan Sponsors | 46,000+ | 48,000+ |
| Founded | 1879 | 1862 |
Ratings Comparison
| Category | Principal | John Hancock |
|---|---|---|
| Fees & Costs | 3.5/5 | 3.5/5 |
| Investment Options | 3.8/5 | 3.7/5 |
| Customer Service | 4.2/5 | 4.0/5 |
| Mobile App | 3.9/5 | 3.6/5 |
Fee Comparison
| Fee Type | Principal | John Hancock |
|---|---|---|
| Admin Fees | $1,500 - $5,000/year for small plans | $1,000 - $4,000/year |
| Expense Ratios | 0.25% - 1.5% | 0.30% - 1.3% |
| Trading Fees | Varies | Plan dependent |
| Advisory Fees | 0.40% - 1.0% | 0.40% - 0.90% |
Principal Strengths
- Excellent for small business 401(k) plans
- Bundled benefits solutions
- Strong customer service for plan sponsors
- SimpleInvest managed portfolios
John Hancock Strengths
- Unique wellness program integration
- Vitality rewards for healthy behavior
- Strong financial wellness education
- complete planning tools
Rollover, Loans & Withdrawals
| Feature | Principal | John Hancock |
|---|---|---|
| Rollover Platform | Principal.com | myplan.johnhancock.com |
| Loans Available | Yes | Yes |
| Withdrawal Methods | Online via Principal.com, Phone (800-547-7754) | Online via myplan.johnhancock.com, Phone (800-395-1113) |
| Distribution Options | Lump sum, Partial withdrawal, Installment payments, Annuity purchase, Rollover to IRA | Lump sum, Partial withdrawal, Installment payments, Rollover to IRA |
Which Should You Choose?
Choose Principal if you want:
- Small businesses
- Bundled benefit seekers
- Companies wanting insurance integration
Choose John Hancock if you want:
- Wellness-focused employers
- Mid-sized companies
- Insurance bundle seekers
Our Verdict: Principal vs John Hancock
Principal Financial wins this comparison with a score of 8.3/10 vs 7.7/10. Principal excels with excellent for small business 401(k) plans, making it the stronger choice for most investors in this matchup. However, the best choice ultimately depends on your specific needs, employer plan availability, and investment preferences.
Other Popular Comparisons
Compare these 401(k) providers head-to-head
Vanguard vs John HancockCompare these 401(k) providers head-to-head
Schwab vs John HancockCompare these 401(k) providers head-to-head
Empower vs John HancockCompare these 401(k) providers head-to-head
T. Rowe Price vs John HancockCompare these 401(k) providers head-to-head
Principal vs ADPCompare these 401(k) providers head-to-head
Principal vs John Hancock: Complete 401(k) Comparison for 2026
Choosing between Principal Financial and John Hancock for your 401(k) is an important decision that affects your retirement savings. Principal offers small business focus while John Hancock is known for wellness focus. In terms of fees, Principal charges 0.25% - 1.5% expense ratios compared to John Hancock's 0.30% - 1.3%. Principal manages $700 billion in assets and serves 6 million participants, while John Hancock has $600 billion AUM and 3 million participants.
Key Differences: Principal vs John Hancock
When comparing Principal and John Hancock, consider their core strengths: Principal excels with excellent for small business 401(k) plans, while John Hancock stands out for unique wellness program integration. Both providers offer a wide range of investment options including target-date funds, index funds, and managed accounts. Principal's customer service rating is 4.2/5 compared to John Hancock's 4.0/5. For mobile experience, Principal scores 3.9/5 while John Hancock scores 3.6/5.
Which Provider is Right for You?
Choose Principal if you prioritize small businesses. Choose John Hancock if you're looking for wellness-focused employers. Your decision should also consider your employer's plan availability, fee sensitivity, desired investment options, and customer service expectations. For detailed reviews, visit our individual Principal and John Hancock provider pages.
Frequently Asked Questions
Principal Financial scores higher in our 2026 rankings with 8.3/10. Principal is best for small businesses, while John Hancock is best for wellness-focused employers. The right choice depends on your employer's plan and your priorities.
Principal charges expense ratios of 0.25% - 1.5% with admin fees of $1,500 - $5,000/year for small plans. John Hancock charges 0.30% - 1.3% expense ratios with admin fees of $1,000 - $4,000/year. Principal's fees rating is 3.5/5 compared to John Hancock's 3.5/5.
Yes, you can roll over between Principal and John Hancock. Principal uses Principal.com for rollovers, while John Hancock uses myplan.johnhancock.com. A direct rollover avoids mandatory tax withholding. Contact your new provider to initiate the transfer.
Principal offers 401(k) loans. John Hancock offers 401(k) loans. Both providers typically allow loans up to 50% of your vested balance or $50,000, whichever is less.
Principal scores 3.8/5 for investment options, while John Hancock scores 3.7/5. Both offer target-date funds, index funds, and managed accounts. Principal's investment options include Mutual Funds, Target Date Funds, Stable Value. John Hancock offers Mutual Funds, Target Date Funds, Stable Value.
For small businesses, consider plan minimums and per-participant costs. Principal is best for small businesses, bundled benefit seekers, companies wanting insurance integration. John Hancock is best for wellness-focused employers, mid-sized companies, insurance bundle seekers. Compare admin fees: Principal charges $1,500 - $5,000/year for small plans vs John Hancock's $1,000 - $4,000/year.
Pavlo Pyskunov
Managing Director & Investment Fund Director
Pavlo Pyskunov analyzes employer-sponsored retirement plans using IRS publications and DOL Form 5500 filings, helping workers maximize their 401(k) savings through data-driven guidance.
Last updated: 2026-03-30