lezz discuss
Neither.
CEO of 100 b company which manages 1000b
Way too many factors
lol i mean personally i thought the invesmtner manager firm technically has the better job because he can just take control of the corp, fire the ceo and hire himself. but then the investment dude prolly has to answer to his clients and run the company at or better than the reg ceo dude he just fired!
as the investmente manager, you are more diversified. you can also get in and out of positions if the co you work for sucks. you dont really have to run anything. you are essentially a middle man dude.
in terms of comp, investment dude is pocketing maybe 20 to 40 bps of aum, vs a ceo which can widely vary, i estimate 2bps to 100 bps.
Just comparing comp/wealth, CEOs of $100B companies make about $20mm a year (I looked up Paypal as an example).
The owner of a $100B asset manager, assuming they own 100% of the firm and don’t have a salaried position, is worth around $6B.
^lol fair point! maybe lets downgrade it to CIO.
They don’t make as much as you may think. CEO ~$5-6mm a year. CIO ~$4-5mm a year. Maybe another million or two with stock options and bonuses.
CEOs of $100B companies make way, way more.
So is it fair to say that a guy worth $6,000m could pull in $20m in income?
In munis.
Indeed. You would only need 33 bps in yield.
My vote would also be neither. I think the small to midsize business owner (~$2-20M net income) is probably the sweet spot. More free reign, hard assets to play with, business is usually more closely knit, only answer to customers, ability to make it your own. Without shareholders utilizing business assets (cars, planes) for personal use is much more relaxed although still semi constrained by IRS.
Ummm…being a tax accountant…I would hardly consider $2-20m in income to be a “small business owner”.
Don’t want to argue semantics, but I think that if you’re pulling in that kind of cash, you have a really big operation. Or at least not the one where you have “freedom”.
You’re assuming that this is all investable assets and not tied up in illiquid or other non-cash-producing assets.
You’re right.
Warren Buffett’s income is around $17m, I think, and he’s worth $80b. That’s a “yield” of 2.1 bps.
Just food for thought.