<prompt> Human: I dont really see the incentive to max out the legal limit if employer only matches x amount that is below said limit. 401k plans are highly restrictive in their investment options, and tend to fluctuate with the movement of the overall markets, making them not ideal for positioning to protect against negative movement or opportunity. So, why not max the 401k to what will be matched, and invest the rest otherwise? Is it the tax benefit? Haha whats the point of that? You get rocked by fees and taxes anyway when you redeem. I just dont see the appeal in 401k plans, it seems like a smoke and mirrors game to get people invested in these gigantic mutual funds with ridiculous fees, all under the guise of a faux tax advantage and an employer match which gets eroded away by fees upon redemption anyway. And while we are at it, can someone explain to me what the inventive is for my employer to contribute their money to match my 401k deposits? Thank you all so much.  <response>: Even unmatched 401k savings have massive advantages over normal taxable investments. In that example, its worth over 13k on just aa 10k investment.My 401k has broadly diversified index fund with no loads and expense ratios below 0.15. Exactly what I would invest in in normal taxable accounts. Not all are that good, but usually the tax advantage is worth it unless the expense ratios are above 1.5 in the 401k. ridiculously highand tend to fluctuate with the movement of the overall markets, making them not ideal for positioning to protect against negative movement or opportunity.Not sure what you mean by this. Normal investments index funds outside of 401ks do the same thing. 