Hacker News Reader

Comment by onlyrealcuzzo | Hacker News Reader

My understanding is that at least Chase, Blackrock, and Visa are rapidly raising their pay for new engineering / analyst hires. Is this not true?

View on HN

I can speak for the bank I worked at - this is true, but the base pay level was very low to begin with and the increase is nowhere near competitive for the most talented engineers. Also, the experienced engineers at those companies are salty about new hires making more then they are.

Again, this stems from the culture of financial institutions where tech workers are viewed as support staff, not strategically critical, despite what financial institutions say publicly.

I know for a fact that base pay for a first year SWE with a BS+MS in CS at Goldman just broke $100k a couple years ago. That probably sounds like a lot to most people, but if you're hiring staff to live and work in NYC, especially when there's an absolutely massive Google campus 10 minutes North of the GS HQ, that's pretty much table stakes. Never mind the glaring cultural differences.

Does that take bonuses into account? Goldman (and others in the industry) tend to have lower base pay with a much higher bonus. It's typical for low level employees to get a year-end bonus equal to about 50-60% of their salary. As they advance to mid-level their bonus will equal their salary and, if they're in a senior position, it will greatly exceed their salary.

Bonuses are not that high at Goldman and their comp still does not compare to FAANG, it never will.

Keep in mind it easily could at the stroke of a pen though. It's entirely their choice to not compensate competitively.

https://tipalti.com/profit-per-employee/

Visa regularly makes double the profit per employee of FAANG - so, yes, they could easily pay more.

Thanks for the source to backup that feeling.

Don't all the smart companies avoid making any profit at all, since profit is taxed (but share buybacks are not)?

You have to buy your shares with FCF (usually profit) or debt.

They have profits. They just aren't in the US.

"Back office" (which includes most programmers, with the exception of algo traders) bonuses are much much lower than "front office" (traders, ibankers, sales) bonuses.

Google/FB devs total comp (including RSUs) will easily beat Goldman devs by 150-200%, depending upon your performance.

This is strictly base pay, but the bonuses are simply not that good for the average SWE at the banks, because as others have said, technologists are seen as a supporting role. There are exceptions, but a much more senior coworker of mine that worked at a number of HF's and banks once told me a good rule of thumb is that the further away you are from executing a trade, the lower your comp. Of course, management doesn't really follow that rule.

This is all with worse work/life balance, low flexibility, (GS was the first big bank to recall everyone and enforce working on site I believe.), a 'conservative' tech stack if you're lucky or a simply unpleasant one if you're not, and generally not being valued the same way as you would be at a FAANG or typical tech company.

Do banks not offer engineers RSUs?

If so, $100k plus a 15% bonus is laughably low. Even shitty startups pay new grads more than that.

My understanding is that GS's interview is actually harder to pass than a lot of FAANG companies. So you have to wonder why anyone would even interview there if the pay is that low...

Goldman’s payday is through bonuses, not the base salary.

Only if you're in a front office role, which the vast majority of SWEs aren't.

No? Even at entry level, you’re still getting $150k for base+bonus. You can expect at least 25% to be bonus if not more.

Maybe you and I have a different concept of payday.

What makes GS less than FAANG is the annual stock grant FAANGs throw at software engineers, and of course it Finance.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com