CEOs earn 614 times more than workers at US’s 100 lowest-paying corporations
An Institute for Policy Studies analysis found that chief executives at the 100 largest S&P 500 companies with the lowest median worker pay earned, on average, 614 times their employees’ pay in 2025. The report highlights widening pay inequality, arguing that executive rewards have risen far faster than workers’ pay and inflation, while many employees may depend on public assistance.
Average CEO compensation at the firms was $17.5m, compared with median worker pay of $36,571; from 2019 to 2025, CEO pay rose 41.4% while median pay increased 20.7%, below 25.9% inflation. The companies spent $108.6bn on share buybacks in 2025, including Walmart’s $8.1bn; its former chief executive Doug McMillon received $29.2m, or 958 times its median worker pay of $30,520. IPS proposed measures including higher taxes on large CEO-worker pay gaps and buybacks; Walmart did not respond to requests for comment.
- Low-wage corporations’ CEOs earned 614 times median worker pay.
- CEO pay rose twice as fast as workers’ pay since 2019.
- The firms spent $108.6bn on share buybacks in 2025.
New here? Start with this
S&P 500 companies are among the largest publicly traded businesses in the United States. Their chief executives lead the companies, while median worker pay is the point at which half of employees earn more and half earn less.
The Institute for Policy Studies is a research organisation that examines economic and social policy. Its analysis compares executive compensation with worker pay at large companies, against a wider debate about how pay is shared and how firms use profits, including for share buybacks, which reduce the number of shares available to investors.
The issue matters to workers, shareholders and policymakers because differences in pay can affect household finances and public debate about inequality. Proposals such as changing taxes on executive pay gaps or buybacks are part of that debate.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
CEO compensation has surged 41.4% since 2019 whilst median worker pay rose only 20.7%, falling behind inflation entirely. Companies generating substantial profits simultaneously spend vast sums on share buybacks that benefit executives and shareholders rather than raising worker wages, even as many employees depend on public assistance. This reflects not competitive market dynamics but structural inequality where workers lack meaningful bargaining power. Progressive taxation on extreme pay ratios represents a reasonable policy response to address this widening gap without fundamentally disrupting markets.
The case against
CEO compensation reflects competitive markets for scarce executive talent whose strategic decisions directly impact company performance, shareholder value and employment levels across billions of pounds in market capitalisation. Worker pay is determined by labour supply and demand; if companies offered inadequate compensation, they would struggle to recruit and retain necessary staff. Share buybacks efficiently return capital to all shareholders, including pension funds and retirement savers. Excessive taxation could reduce investment incentives and business competitiveness, potentially harming the very workers such policies aim to assist.