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

Why integrated reporting makes sense: Robert Eccles

Robert Eccles has been trying to change the nature of corporate reporting for more than 20 years. He has been an advocate for supplementing financials with information on non-financial factors that are leading indicators of financial results – such as product development, customer satisfaction and the development of intangible assets. The premise is those companies

Opportunities in Europe

Investors and academics agree that political developments in Greece are important because they may shape how financial markets will respond to future political situations in the Eurozone. But according to Olivier Rousseau, the executive director of the FFR, the French pension reserve fund, there is more hype outside of the Eurozone on the implications of

More evidence big is better in pension funds

A pension fund that has 10 times more assets under management has on average 7.67 basis points lower annual investment costs according to a working paper from authors at De Nederlansche Bank, that explores the relationship between pension fund size and investment costs. Written by Dirk Broeders, Arco van Oord and David Rijsbergen the paper

European investment plan requires public private collaboration

The two largest institutional investors in the Netherlands, PGGM and APG, have responded to the European Commission’s investment plan, urging the commission to call on institutional investors to collaborate on the investment proposal. However they also warn that institutional investors are not just a “subsidising entity” and the Juncker Plan is best executed as a

Why Andrew Ang joined Blackrock

Andrew Ang believes factor investing is a more efficient way to organise a portfolio as it allows liquid and illiquid strategies to be managed across the portfolio. It also has the added benefit of honing managers on value creation. He’s been working with a handful of investors while Professor of Finance at Columbia University on

The power of engagement

It is called the “CalPERS’ Effect” but it could easily be called the asset owner effect, or the institutional investor effect, or the power of engagement effect. Wilshire, which is a consultant to the $300 billion Californian fund CalPERS, has provided an update on its study measuring the effect of engagement on a targeted list of companies called the Focus List.

Previous