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

Opportunities vast in credit, but public markets less risky: Wurts

Investment grade corporate debt, non-agency residential and commercial mortgages, high yield corporate debt, and private equity distressed debt all constitute recommended potential mandates in the credit markets, according to director of research at US-based Wurts and Associates, Eric Petroff. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

Decision-making revamp crucial to exploiting investment opportunities

Investors with investment decision-making processes that embrace uncertainty and manage risk will be the investment winners in the next five years, according to global chief investment officer of Mercer, Tim Gardener, who believes institutional investors need to revamp their decision-making processes. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

Rebalancing revisited: putting risk back on the table

By adopting a contrarian approach to rebalancing which takes account of both assets and liabilities, pension funds could enhance long-term returns and reduce the volatility within their portfolios, new research reveals. Rebalancing Revisited, a paper by Syd Bone, former chief executive of VFMC, and Andrew Goddard, an ex-Russell investment veteran, advocates super funds rebalance to

Abu Dhabi fund hires up for regional M&A service

Continuing its expansionist aims, the Abu Dhabi Investment Corporation (ADIC) has lured an investment banker from Rothschild to focus on cross-border merger and acquisition (M&A) activity, which it expects to spike as the financial crisis wears on. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

Beware the illiquidity delirium when buying-up credit

Bond markets might be offering comparable returns to equities and a higher place in the capital structure, but they should be approached cautiously as they lack what institutions around the world are trying to maintain – liquidity. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

European funds look to alternatives to manage future risk

European pension schemes are increasing their allocations to non-traditional asset classes as a way to manage risk as a result of turbulent market-prompted investment reviews, according to Mercer’s annual European Asset Allocation Survey. mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

Previous