Research: CEO pay peaked in 1990s

In this paper, Steven Kaplan from the University of Chicago Booth School of Business and National Bureau of Economic Research considers the evidence for three common perceptions of US chief executive officer pay and corporate governance.

The first is that chief executive officers are overpaid and their pay keeps increasing; the second is that CEOs are not paid for performance; and, finally, that boards do not penalise CEOs for poor performance.

While average CEO pay increased substantially through the 1990s, it has declined since then, Kaplan finds.

CEO pay levels relative to other highly paid groups today are comparable to their average levels in the early 1990s.

In fact, the relative pay of large company CEOs is similar to its average level since the 1930s, the research indicates.

Kaplan’s work also reveals that the ratio of large-company-CEO pay to firm market value has also remained roughly constant since 1960.

Sponsored Content

This suggests that similar forces, likely technology and scale, have played a meaningful role in driving CEO pay, along with the pay of other top-income earners.

Kaplan also looks at the rate of CEO turnover and how executive pay is determined by the market.

Consistent with that is the widespread majority-shareholder support companies’ pay policies have received, despite the beefing up of regulations around shareholder rights and executive compensation.

Kaplan notes that top executive pay policies at over 98 per cent of S&P 500 and Russell 3000 companies received majority-shareholder support in the Dodd-Frank-mandated Say-On-Pay votes in 2011.

To read more, click here.

Leave a Comment

GIC, Temasek eye trillions of growth in climate adaptation market

GIC, Temasek eye trillions of growth in climate adaptation market

Singapore’s two largest asset owners, GIC and Temasek, see attractive opportunities in climate adaptation solutions – a relatively underfunded area compared to decarbonisation. The former has already made selective adaptation investments and said the opportunity set across public and private debt and equity could increase to $9 trillion by 2050.

Sort content by

Macroeconomic risk and hedge fund returns

This paper estimates hedge fund and mutual fund exposure to newly proposed measures of macroeconomic risk that are interpreted as measures of economic uncertainty. The academics, from Georgetown and Stern, find the resulting uncertainty betas explain a significant proportion of the cross-sectional dispersion in hedge fund returns. However, the same is not true for mutual

Active ownership

Academics from the London Business School, Boston College and Temple University, examine the outperformance of US public companies following corporate social responsibility engagement.

Capturing illiquidity premiums

This paper commissioned by the Norwegian Ministry of Finance investigates the possibilities for the Government Pension Fund Global (GPFG) to profit from liquidity premiums in  illiquid investments. It looks at the empirical evidence for the presence of liquidity effects in a broad range of asset classes: listed equities, corporate bonds, treasury and agency bonds, and

A trustee guide to factor investing

This research by academics at Tilburg University and the VU University Amsterdam, looks at the hurdles of implementing factor investing. It translates those into a checklist for implementing factor investing. The research, conducted for Robeco, finds that three approaches to factor investing are emerging and conducts case studies to examine how these approaches are implemented

Manager risk contribution in a multi-manager portfolio

This paper by MSCI creates a framework in order to answer the question: given a portfolio of managers, how does the active risk of each manager relate to the active risk of the portfolio? Asset owners often measure manager risk (the active risk of each manager) and have difficulty relating it to the contribution each

How active is your real estate fund manager?

Using detailed data from IPD, this paper looks at the holdings and performance of 256 UK commercial real estate funds from 2002-2011. It concludes the more active funds, those further from benchmark holdings, outperform but are not accompanied by higher risk.   To access the paper click here How active is your real estate fund

Previous