Alternatives to Forvis Mazars, LLP for 401(k) Audits

Peer audit practices selected by overlapping state footprint and similar engagement volume, from plan year 2024 Form 5500 filings. A neutral comparison: no firm pays to appear, and listing is not a recommendation.

Last updated September 6, 2026 · Source data: plan year 2024 Form 5500 filings

Which firms are comparable to Forvis Mazars, LLP for 401(k) plan audits?

Forvis Mazars, LLP audited 2,583 retirement plans in plan year 2024 across 52 states and territories (#3 nationally). Closest comparable practices by footprint and volume: CliftonLarsonAllen LLP and CBIZ CPAS P.C.; the table below lists 10 firms with linked profiles.

Forvis Mazars, LLP at a glance

Forvis Mazars, LLP: plan year 2024 Form 5500 audit engagements (for comparison)
Measure	Value
Retirement plan audits (401(k), 403(b), pension)	2,583
All audited filings (incl. welfare plans)	2,687
States and territories with clients	52
National rank by retirement plan volume	#3 of 3,956
Average client size (participants)	1,981
Largest client (participants)	286,355
Largest state concentrations	NC 217 · TX 217 · IN 195

Full profile, including opinion mix and largest audited plans: Forvis Mazars, LLP.

Audit firms comparable to Forvis Mazars, LLP

Peer practices by footprint overlap and engagement volume relative to Forvis Mazars, LLP, plan year 2024
#	Firm	Retirement plans audited	States served	States shared with Forvis Mazars, LLP	Footprint overlap	Avg. client size
1	CliftonLarsonAllen LLP	3,276	51	51	46%	1,502
2	CBIZ CPAS P.C.	1,616	48	48	54%	2,237
3	Crowe LLP	930	40	40	62%	4,730
4	BDO USA, P.C.	1,237	45	45	54%	3,242
5	Baker Tilly US, LLP	3,633	51	50	43%	2,136
6	RSM US LLP	954	45	45	56%	1,490
7	Grant Thornton LLP	781	40	40	57%	5,006
8	Ernst & Young LLP	519	42	42	54%	21,834
9	Caron & Bletzer, PLLC	1,133	41	41	36%	863
10	WithumSmith+Brown, PC	870	39	39	38%	5,491

Ordered by similarity to Forvis Mazars, LLP, not by size. Footprint overlap is the share of the two firms’ state distributions that coincide (100% = identical state mix). Candidates: firms with between 517 and 12,915 retirement plan audits (within 5× of Forvis Mazars, LLP’s volume). Average client size is the mean beginning-of-year participant count of the firm’s audited retirement plans.

Rankings derived from U.S. Department of Labor Form 5500 filings, plan year 2024. Read the full methodology.

Where the footprints overlap

Forvis Mazars, LLP’s largest states and the comparable firms most active there, plan year 2024
State	Forvis Mazars, LLP plans	Comparable firms active in the state (plans audited)
North Carolina	217	CliftonLarsonAllen LLP (75), Crowe LLP (35), BDO USA, P.C. (31)
Texas	217	Baker Tilly US, LLP (308), Crowe LLP (148), BDO USA, P.C. (102)
Indiana	195	Crowe LLP (70), CBIZ CPAS P.C. (66), RSM US LLP (51)
Missouri	188	CliftonLarsonAllen LLP (67), CBIZ CPAS P.C. (44), RSM US LLP (28)
New York	167	CBIZ CPAS P.C. (203), BDO USA, P.C. (181), Caron & Bletzer, PLLC (171)

State reflects the plan sponsor’s address on Form 5500. Each state link opens the full ranked directory for that state.

How these alternatives were selected

Every firm in the dataset with at least 25 retirement plan audits in plan year 2024 was scored against Forvis Mazars, LLP on two measures: footprint overlap — how closely its distribution of clients across states matches Forvis Mazars, LLP’s — and volume similarity — how close its engagement count is on a logarithmic scale. Candidates are first limited to a volume band around Forvis Mazars, LLP’s count (widened only when fewer than 8 firms qualify), then ranked by a weighted score (60% footprint, 40% volume). Ties resolve by volume, then name. The result is deterministic and rebuilds identically from the same filings.

What the score does not measure: audit quality, fees, staffing, industry focus, or fit for your plan. Volume and footprint indicate which firms do this work at comparable scale in the same places; they are a shortlist, not a verdict. Use each profile’s opinion mix and client-size figures, then the questions in how to switch 401(k) auditors to compare on what matters — EBPAQC membership, peer review results, team continuity, and a like-for-like fee.

Comparable-firm tables for other leading practices

Alternatives pages exist for the 25 largest employee benefit plan audit practices by retirement plan volume in plan year 2024.

About this page

Generated from public U.S. Department of Labor Form 5500 filings in which each firm is named as the plan’s independent qualified public accountant. None of the firms shown supplied, reviewed, or endorsed this comparison, and inclusion is neither a recommendation nor a criticism of any firm, including Forvis Mazars, LLP. Filing data can contain sponsor-entered errors; corrections are welcome via the about page.