Do you get what you pay for?

A pay-for-performance measure of chief investment officers in the US has revealed paying more for an executive does not translate to better performance.

Developed by executive recruitment firm, Charles Skorina & Company, the index is calculated by assessing an institution’s investment returns over the past five years, and measuring it against the salary of the CIO.

A basis points earned per $100,000 of compensation is derived and then the CIO’s are ranked by this measure of “performance for pay”.

By this calculation, John Hull, chief investment officer of the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation was the highest performing CIO, with 105 basis points per $100,000 of salary.

Hull manages $5.1 billion and earns $620,000, ranking him 46 out of 50 on Skorina’s list of highest paid CIOs in the US.

The highest paid CIO on this top 50 list is Harvard endowment’s Jane Mendillo earning around $4.7 million in total compensation, followed by Yale’s David Swensen with around $3.7 million.

Sponsored Content

Endowments dominate the list, with Texas Teachers’ CIO, Britt Harris the only pension fund chief investment officer featuring on the list, earning just over $1 million according to the Skorina data.

Applying the performance for pay calculation reveals Harris generated 29 basis points per $100,000 of salary; Swensen 16, and Mendillo 10.

Skorina says institutional investment boards have been asking him for years to develop a measure of performance for pay and so his aim was to develop a basic, objective and consistent measure.

“Chief investment officers and asset managers measure their service providers every day, but have excuses for why it doesn’t apply to them,” he says. “We wanted to create a simple measure, to create an MER for CIOs. If they think a measure such as basis points per dollar of their salary shouldn’t be used then earnings per share shouldn’t be used, and the S&P and Dow Jones would be defunct.

“You can say that each fund has different benchmarks and measures, but what it gets down to is how much money was made for the institution. An institution will forget about all the other things if you have a negative return.”

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE CIO PERFORMANCE-FOR-PAY TABLE

2 responses to “Do you get what you pay for?”

  1. Chris Ailman

    David Villa and Charles Cary are both with Public Funds.

    While you point out people will always disagree, one does have to ask if the CIO had full discretion over Asset Allocation and risk appetite. It certainly isn’t level across these funds. I realize it’s the most recent time period, but would you ever use the data from 1928 to 1932 to measure someone’s performance?

    1. AMANDA WHITE

      Thanks for your comment Chris.
      Clearly it is more complicated than a simple basis points/$ figure, particularly at fiduciaries where the board sets strategy and the role of the investment team is to implement.
      I also take your point about time frames. One of the enduring challenges for the industry across the globe is to think, and act, with only long term goals in mind. I’d welcome ideas on how we can challenge the industry, in particular service providers and stakeholders, to think like that – long-term mandates perhaps?

Leave a Comment

Sort content by

Mubadala, GE set to make first JV co-investments

Abu Dhabi’s $14 billion Mubadala Development Company and General Electric (GE) are on the verge of making their first co-investment under the $8 billion financial services joint venture created in June. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

FRR joins oil payments transparency initiative

France’s 28.8 billion ($41.7 billion) Fonds de Reserve Pour Les Retraites (FRR) has joined more than 80 institutional investors globally in becoming a signatory to an initiative aimed at strengthening transparency in the extractive industries sector through disclosure around company payments and government revenues from mining, oil and gas. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

California passes placement agent disclosure bill

In the latest chapter regarding the role of third-party placement agents, the California Senate has passed a bill supported by the state’s largest pension fund, CalPERS, aimed at increasing transparency around the fees paid to these agents doing business with public pension plans. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

The scientific side of the active/passive debate

The recent decision by Norway’s SWF and some large US pension funds to explore their active management allocations, reported last week by conexust1f.flywheelstaging.com, reflects the re-ignition of the age-old active versus passive debate. But according to the scientifically-based INTECH, if maths prevails, it is an argument that is dead in the water. Amanda White spoke

CPPIB consortium purchases Skype majority

The C$116 billion ($105 billion) Canadian Pension Plan Investment Board is part of an investor group led by private equity technology-specialist, Silver Lake, that has purchased a majority-stake in Skype Technologies from eBay, and “plans to build the company into a core internet franchise at huge scale”. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

UK’s Lothian Pension Fund boosts alternatives

The £2.3 billion ($3.7 billion) Lothian Pension Fund, part of the Scottish Local Government Pension Scheme, has overhauled its investment strategy, increasing its alternatives weighting to more than one third of the total fund, after poor performance in financial year 2008-09 wiped 17 per cent off the fund’s value. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

Previous