Jump to content

Companies using ROIC in their executive remuneration


Okonomen

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

 

I am very convinced that companies using ROIC in their remuneration packages to execs outperform those that do not in the long run. However, afaik there's not screening tools or anything to search for companies using ROIC as performance measure, thus making it a long and boring task to run through numerous remuenration reports etc.

 

Does anyone know of a list of companies using ROIC as performance measure? Or do you have other suggestions that could help me?

 

Thanks! : -)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed, but doesn't seem like anyone can help. It's interesting that there exists so many screening tools on financials etc but when it comes to management compensation - which I think is as important as the business model and financials - no screening tools exist :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^It seems like the most natural thing to do is to find a good business at a good price and then to assess if the executive suite is aligned but I can see the rationale because executive compensation is an important variable to look at.

In my limited experience, almost all compensation packages do not take into account meaningful long-term return measures into their 'long-term' incentive plans.

For instance, my understanding of the Colgate-Palmolive example (which is typical) is that the relevant committee may use ROIC or EVA-type measures but, in fact, do not, as they seem to use growth of sales, EPS growth and total shareholder return over a 3-year evaluation period.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/21665/000120677419001074/cl3440361-def14a.htm

 

Another nagging issue is the fact that companies keep adapting their packages (including when return on capital measures are involved) "to better reflect industry conditions" when, in fact, adaptations are made to maximize short term remuneration outcomes irrespective of long term outcomes. A company I follow and own (Aimia), in 2018, decided to not use the long-term incentive plan and used instead a newly defined short term plan because of a challenging 2018 year. ::)

It also seems that using total shareholder return may be an adequate proxy versus supposedly better measures such as ROIC but only over a longer time frame (10 years? or more) and this is simply not applied in the modern corporate world. This was the idea behind the one-dollar premise of retained earnings described by Mr. Buffett (long term weighting versus short term voting).

I still think that the most reliable measure to determine the level of shareholder-orientation from managers is the amount of ownership that they build and maintain over time especially when they use their own money (earned or not) to buy shares in the open market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed, this is for me a 'if you trust the people, then you trust what they do'.

But ROIC enumeration could be a sign that you're on to a good management. Although...I have seen too many cases of managements that had some one dimensional quirk of good management alongside several other not so good ones. The alignment of several favourable variables is really a thing of beauty and I think the key idea is that it is quite rare. If you find a handful of situations like that say 10-15, you should also be tap dancing to work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...