My wife works for a charitable foundation, and continuously complains about the quality of their software. Once she asked her IT director why they can't get someone like me in to just fix it, and her IT director was like "We can't afford someone like your husband."
They are also (AFAIK) based to a large degree on self reporting which you have to imagine would skew high. If I had an amazing salary I’d want to self report it and tell levels and HN all about it. If I have a normal salary, maybe I keep that to myself.
Anecdotally I’ve worked at two companies featured on levels.FYI and my total comp was nowhere near what they were reporting for similar roles... like 50-66%—they were waaaay off. Either I am consistently grossly underpaid or levels biases high.
Whenever possible, we collect verified offers / pay stubs / W-2s to anchor the data on the site. While our self reported data is definitely the more popular choice for submission, we are able to determine general bands and find blatant outliers for certain companies and remove them. I think we might be the only consumer facing salary site to do this afaik.
Some more info: https://levels.fyi/verified
We also do provide a community reporting feature much like the flag feature here on HN, which we actively monitor.
Even after all we do, we are after all only as good as the data we collect. The more contributions we receive the more we can color in the whole picture. Feel free to email us any suggestions at hello[at]levels.fyi
A lot of people seem to make this mistake, so hopefully your data cleaners have solved that.
We had this issue earlier on in our first 2 years since our form was much more rudimentary – could it be that the data points you're visiting are from 2019 or earlier? Also in any case, feel free to report those entries, and we'll make sure to take a look.
If anything, I would say Levels.fyi underrepresents average total comp for many of the listed companies, because: 1) they don't take into account refreshers, where given, and 2) they don't take into account stock growth (which, yes, is not guaranteed, but it wouldn't be _unreasonable_ from a perspective of estimating Expected Value to assume whatever RSUs you get will track overall market growth, just with more volatility)
Since you always enter a company with 0 YOE at that company (or at least, a clean slate of RSU tranches), the data points of employees who 'got in' early aren't relevant to an offer you might receive.
https://levels.fyi/comp.html?showFilters
This is also available on our level specific pages, for example for Google L3: https://www.levels.fyi/company/Google/salaries/Software-Engi...
Though I do agree it would be really nice to have this reflected in our visuals or aggregates where possible.
Love the new reporting feature, way less friction than sending an email.
I don't know why people get confused by this; most people working SWE in the bay area will never see a vaunted Levels.fyi equivalent salary (although most of them will exceed national averages for software).
Basing your understanding of software salaries across the industry on levels.fyi is a bit like basing an understanding of national lawyer salaries on a sampling from top NYC corporate law firms.
(NB there is some sprinkling of other useful salary info on levels.fyi, but people focus on the FAANG and similar companies, and the data is much better there)
Your plumbers should move to Vancouver