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

Poll results: Do CIOs of US public pension funds get paid adequately?

  mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

The Caisse, Future Fund into infrastructure

Two of the world’s biggest institutional investors have recently made significant forays into Australian infrastructure, seeing opportunities in the country across a wide array of assets. Canada’s second largest pool of pension assets, la Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec (the Caisse), has made a $139.2-million investment in five projects. Macky Tall, the fund’s

Cal pension reforms set to pass

Governor of California, Edmund G Brown Jr, has announced proposed legislation that outlines sweeping reforms to the state’s pension system, but appears to have stepped back from a proposal to create a hybrid pension plan. The hybrid defined-contribution/defined-benefit plan was proposed last year when Brown launched a 12-point reform package. It was widely opposed by

DB plans continue to slide

The funded status of US defined-benefit corporate-pension plans continued to worsen last year, despite plan sponsors increasing contributions by $70 billion, a new Mercer study reveals. Mercer found funding levels have slipped to 2009 levels, with the outlook for 2012 likely to extend the bleak news for plan sponsors. The funded status of pension plans

Super standard risk measure

Australian superannuation funds are now required to disclose a measurement of risk to fund members, with trustees encouraged to use a standardised measurement backed by regulators and industry peak bodies. The Standard Risk Measure will provide a rating of a fund’s investment option based on the likely number of negative returns this option is predicted

Robert Merton: the individual plan man

A retirement solution that focuses on outcomes and is customised for each participant cannot be met by existing defined-contribution designs, according to Nobel Prize-winning economist, Robert Merton, who advocates a “next-generation DC solution”. Merton, who is the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Sloan School of Management’s distinguished professor of finance and resident scientist at Dimensional Fund

Previous