
What Is the Highest Salary Can a Programmer Make? - shubhamjain
https://shubhamjain.co/2017/03/08/what-is-the-highest-salary-can-a-programmer-make/
======
chollida1
I think the word Salary here is a bit of a misnomer. Compensation is probably
a better word to use. And the term programmer is probably incorrect in the top
tiers here as you probably aren't strictly a programmer at this level.

For instance, it wouldn't be all that unusual for a programmer at a hedge fund
to have a salary of $200,000 and a bonus of 1x that.

But its also very common for people at funds to keep the majority of their
bonus in the fund such that if you have say $1,000,000 in the fund and it does
20% that year you can conceivably claim a compensation on the year of $200,000
(salary) + $200,000 (bonus) + $200,000 ( cap gains).

You can argue something similar if you work for a public company where your
salary, bonus and capital gains on stock grants can be factored similarly.

Now there is probably some salary inflation going on here where people are
counting compensation that is restricted over a few years as though they
earned it all in the current year.

> I see about an offer per quarter of $500-900k base with $1-2M bonus (usually
> guaranteed for the first year) for pure technology role. Add more front
> office work and the bonus potential shoots up (but it's a tough gig at the
> moment at least).

This seems high and I don't know of any funds that actually guarantee tech
hires a million dollar bonus regardless of what the fund does, I mean that's
kind of the point of going to work for a hedge fund, you eat what you kill. If
you and the fund do well you get paid, if the fund doesn't make money, you're
not going to get a huge bonus.

But Niall Dalton, if you are listening and not lying about this comp, ummm,
I'm available:)

~~~
acchow
Your cap gains example is irrelevant. If you have $1m saved up, you could make
passive income elsewhere - stock market, mutual fund, real estate - the fact
that you decided to park it at your employer's fund doesn't make the passive
income related to your job.

What fund can guarantee better-than-market returns anyway?

~~~
ng12
There's a whole world of investments you and I don't have access to because
we're a few $B short. As a perk some shops allow employees some access to
their funds, like a parallel to RSUs or equity.

~~~
nugget
Calling it "a whole world of investments" is a little extreme. Access to
almost all asset classes is available for even the smallest of investors.

Absent a mysterious Renaissance-like trading algorithm that magically prints
out-performance, diversification is the only free lunch, and it's cheap and
easy to massively diversify these days.

~~~
ng12
I mean there are lots of funds/managers you can only invest with if you have a
few hundred million to play with. Sure, they invest in the same asset classes
you do except in theory they do it way better.

~~~
jorvi
Which doesn't matter because over the long run almost no funds beat the market
average.

~~~
ng12
I don't understand why people parrot this sentiment all the time. Lots of
crappy startups hand out worthless equity -- would you say "most tech stocks
aren't worth anything"? Sure there are bad investment firms out there and
those don't tend to last very long. There are many firms which handily beat
the market, they wouldn't be around if they didn't.

~~~
jjeaff
You would think so, but taking into account fees, there are actually ZERO
funds that beat the market over a 30 year period. You can research this on
morningstar. Maybe there are some super secret private funds out there that
beat the market over the long period (Madoff's fund was one of them).

So ya, you would think they wouldn't stay in business, but marketing and
complexity is powerful.

Their best trick is to hold a ton of funds in their portfolio then show you
the ones that have had a good run the last 10 years. Then of course a
different ten in a few years. Hold enough assets in enough configurations and
of course you will have some winners over shorter periods of time. But good
luck guessing which ones.

~~~
vostok
I wasn't aware that Morningstar had publicly available hedge fund performance
data. What do they show for Renaissance's Medallion Fund over the last 29
years?

~~~
jjeaff
It of course doesn't have hedge funds, which are black box. And Renaissance is
the "blackest". I find it suspicious that the only funds with long term
performance that "beats the market" are unpublished and secret. Madoff's fund
was on of the few that beat the market consistently too.

------
JimboOmega
Articles like this are kind of frustrating, for the implication that $250k is
standard for a few years experience, and you can easily get it with less.

That's really not been my experience. Not everyone - not _most people_ even -
work at Google.

Related question - at a mid-stage startup (say 100 employees), how does
option/stock compensation work? Do they regularly give you more (like big
companies do) or are the options associated with signing all you get (and
their growth is how they're an ongoing part of compensation)?

~~~
vostok
These articles are correct and $250k is not exceptional for a few years of
experience. They are talking about total compensation and not salary. If you
think this is exceptional then you owe it to yourself to respond to some of
those LinkedIn messages. And, no, this kind of pay is not restricted to
NY/SF/SV/Seattle.

~~~
the_cyber_pass
Look at /r/programming, do you think these people are pulling $250k. They are
closer to the average. If you think $250k is normal you're in an exceptional
bubble.

~~~
vostok
I can get median pay data from the BLS [1] without visiting the cesspool that
is reddit.

The median software developer is shockingly bad. Some developers will claim to
be 4+ sigma talent, but you don't need to be one of them to make $250k.

[1] [https://www.bls.gov/ooh/computer-and-information-
technology/...](https://www.bls.gov/ooh/computer-and-information-
technology/software-developers.htm)

~~~
the_cyber_pass
Are you really willing to tell me that that the average engineer in 3-6 years
can pull in $250k? Your own source says the median is $100,690. How long do
you think those people have been working in the industry? Are they all just
fresh out of college? So if these people all just work 3-6 years should I
expect a bunch of multimillionaires? Can the industry support $250k salaries
for a wider amount of the population?

~~~
vostok
> Are you really willing to tell me that that the average engineer in 3-6
> years can pull in $250k?

I just sent you a link saying that the average engineer makes $100k.

I am claiming that (1) the average developer is awful and (2) you can make
that much and more if you're not awful.

> So if these people all just work 3-6 years should I expect a bunch of
> multimillionaires?

You're not going to be a multimillionaire if you make $250k for 6 years.

~~~
the_cyber_pass
The average developer is average, not awful. You can make more if you are
better than average and know the right people and speak the right language. I
know people who are making $350k, but they are very much an exception and we
both know and understand this. Much of how much you get paid is based around
who you know, your location and your cultural fit. Most people do not live in
the bay area for various reasons and salaries like that are extremely uncommon
outside of there and the upper echelons of the NY finance market.

I was exaggerating, but if you save your money while making 250k you can
easily live off 30k and pocket the rest. It's not hard to become a millionaire
off of that salary in a very short amount of time.

~~~
vostok
> Most people do not live in the bay area for various reasons and salaries
> like that are extremely uncommon outside of there and the upper echelons of
> the NY finance market.

As someone who has actual experience with this, it's easier to get a high
paying job in those areas because that's where the hard problems are being
solved.

Hard problems are usually solved in high cost of living areas because you need
to pay your employees a lot of money and those employees usually prefer to
live in high cost of living areas. I actually have personal experience with
this.

Yes, the cost of living argument applies if your salary is at the low end of
the scale.

If you're solving hard problems at a company that values that kind of stuff,
then you can makes just as much anywhere else. I actually have personal
experience with this too.

No, the cost of living argument does not apply at the high end of the scale.
Cost of living starts to become irrelevant as you make more money.

Sure, rent in NY is $60k per year vs $24k per year in Oklahoma, but it's just
not that important if you're making $1m+ year.

~~~
the_cyber_pass
Ok so first off, rent in Tulsa is 12k at most for a full house.

Second off a lot of the high cost of living has nothing to do with solving
hard problems, if it did the civil engineers would have solved the hard
problem of fixing the housing market in SF. What you are essentially arguing
is Tom Cruise 2.0 makes 6 million a film after a few years in the industry so
therefor everyone else sucks which you can tell because they don't make 6
million. Being generous I would claim it's a survivorship bias.

~~~
vostok
> Second off a lot of the high cost of living has nothing to do with solving
> hard problems

Actually, it's directly related. People who solve hard problems at companies
that value that sort of thing make a lot of money. Generally, people who make
a lot of money want to live in nice areas. Nice areas become expensive as
housing gets bid up by high earners.

~~~
the_cyber_pass
Nice is relative. People who make a lot of money want things relative to their
interests. Areas become more expensive due to poor planning from civil
servants more than Google salaries. NYC, DC, Boston, Atlanta, Austin, London,
Brussels and Berlin are all cities which are also working on "solving hard
problems" but they don't have nearly the cost of living problems that SF has.

~~~
JimboOmega
Also, people who make a lot of money, especially in a given field (like tech)
tend to want to live with each other, which really exacerbates the problem in
markets that resist change (like SF).

Of course, allowing huge office towers to go up but refusing residential
development doesn't help.

------
overcast
You want to get paid insane money, you have to be the boss. Working for
someone else is not how you get bank.

~~~
artursapek
^ and it's easier to get there as a programmer than in most other fields.
There's plenty of one or two-man operations out there.

~~~
joering2
Would love to know a few so I can (maybe) start on a new project...

~~~
urs2102
Great place to start:
[https://www.indiehackers.com/businesses](https://www.indiehackers.com/businesses)

------
tabeth
A somewhat related, but distinct question is: how do you get the skills to
make those high salaries?

I don't care about salaries persay, but I do care about being valuable. Of
course, the two things are very related.

Here are some things I've heard people mention that are chicken-and-egg kind
of answers:

\- Get a great mentor

\- Work at a great company

\- Work on a high performing team

\- Work on a difficult product

Unfortunately, all of these presuppose greatness to begin with, and only help
to become even _more_ great. Which is nice, but not useful for someone trying
to get there to begin with.

I'm in my 2nd year of being a "professional", and I worry if I'm on the right
trajectory, or not. By the way, if someone is reading and is willing to spare
15 minutes of their time I'd love to get your advice, email in profile. Moreso
if you're based in the east.

~~~
Retric
The #1 most important thing for these salary's is to signal competence. Actual
competence is far less important.

~~~
tabeth
How do you "signal competence?"

~~~
freyr
The easiest (or most common) way is to start young: go to a top university.
This makes it far easier to jump into a top company. Then you're mostly there,
without even necessarily programming anything exceptional.

Otherwise, you could get really good at interviewing, write publicly (book,
popular blog, etc.), give talks at conferences, create popular open source
software, etc.

~~~
Retric
That's the first level, obvious credentials. Don't forget that legwork like
SAT prep classes, or presentations which don't teach you useful skills can
still open doors.

Next is networks of people that will vouch for you. This does not necessarily
take a lot of effort, but being the only resume someone is looking means you
just skipped a lot of pre-filters. "I was thinking about possibly jumping
ship. O your looking for someone? How about we do lunch and talk about a
possible fit."

Now add presentation; speech patterns, dress, non verbal indicators, but also
what subjects to bring up in conversation. Pull this off and people will often
skip the need for in depth evaluation based on assumptions.

~~~
ryandrake
This is [sadly] the accurate advice. While "love what you do" and "learn a
lot" and "improve your skills" sound nice, the reality is that success more
often than not comes from pedigree (what school you went to, who your parents
are), people (who you know) and polish (how smoothly you talk/dress, how you
carry yourself, confidence, ability to make small talk, etc.).

EDIT: I'll also add "self-promotion". So, the four P's: Pedigree, People,
Polish, and Promotion.

------
intrasight
That's like asking "What is the highest salary that a pro basketball player
can make?" And it has the same answer: whatever you can negotiate.

~~~
nikcub
Except basketball players literally do have a maximum salary because of the
cap

~~~
p4lindromica
The cap is not a hard barrier (see luxury tax). The CBA, however, is.

~~~
urs2102
Well, nikcub isn't actually wrong. The CBA is the contract that dictates the
relations between the league and the players association. It sets terms for
the league, the salary cap, and the even procedures regarding the draft.

As far the cap goes, there are two caps: the soft cap and the hard cap. The
soft cap is what you're probably referring to. The soft cap is usually broken
all the time, as teams use it to retain players and whatnot. Think of 'Bird
rights'.

The hard cap is what I imagine nikcub was referring to. A hard cap cannot be
exceeded for any reason. Even in a sign-and-trade, since I think 2013, you'd
have to waive a player to be below the cap, or make sure payroll is below the
hard cap in the end.

In the context of nikcub's comment, I think he was referring to the hard cap.

------
patgenzler
In theory the highest salary a programmer can make is infinite. Think WhatsApp
founders, $20 billion acquisition.

The numbers in this post probably apply to less than 0.01% of developers. Most
developers don't even come close, even in Silicon Valley. I have seen people
make those numbers, including one million compensation, and the only
explanation I can come up with is: _right place, right time._

I'm sure there are exceptions, though.

There's only three ways to get above average returns over time: get into one
of the top 5 tech companies that pay well _and_ insert yourself into important
groups and ride a fast track wave; become a premium freelancer and charge
premium rates; or get into a rocketship startup and get a lucky outsized exit.
Lucky because very very few startups have a good exit (for employees). Most
die, or exit in a way investors and founders make some money but employees
don't make anything. Hello liquidation preferences.

Bottom line: get good at what you do, stay in the top 25% in your area, build
a reputation, and go to places where you can add value. Negotiate.

------
techjuice
There is no limit on what you can make, especially in the engineering world.
If you hit a limit at a day job, the limit can be removed by working for
yourself and running your own business. Then you will be limited only by how
much your customers value your work.

------
retrac98
Ugh, this is depressing. Engineers seem to make so much more money in the
states than elsewhere.

I'm UK based/in my late 20s, and a £100k+ salary in regular employment just
seems completely unavailable outside of a big tech firm in London.

~~~
alistairSH
Anybody who claims a $250k compensation package is normal in the US is
bonkers. Somebody posted it in a sibling thread, but the US BLS has the
average salary at $100k. Add benefits and bonuses and you might hit $200k, but
even that's a stretch.

------
johnloeber
I'm surprised to see the omission of top machine learning engineers from this
article, who are currently priced in the $1m-5m range. Facebook has placed
such offers to industry experts, as well as to the world's strongest PhD
students in computer vision. I am under the impression that other tech giants
are competing similarly.

(Note: when I say _top_ , we're talking about a pool of <500 people
worldwide.)

------
sixQuarks
Top two programmers: $87 billion (bill gates), $56 billion (mark zuckerberg)

~~~
jasode
Fyi... MZ's _salary_ is just $1 a year. Other programmers with salaries of
$1/year are Larry Page and Sergei Brin. (But setting aside pedantics of _" net
worth != salary"_, I think we all get your point.)

~~~
walshemj
Which is an aggressive tax avoidance strategy

~~~
lacampbell
Which just goes to show what a joke progressive income tax is. It hits the
upper middle class hard, while ignoring the biggest money earners.

------
bsvalley
This article is confusing. You're talking about $250k being the lowest-highest
salary.

I'm having troubles following you :)

------
partycoder
Only way to achieve that is:

\- working on a project that requires highly specialized training

\- working on a project that is hard to replace

\- working on a project that is critical to the well-functioning of the core
businesses of the company

\- being a good negotiator

\- having the patronage of management

------
mrleiter
Articles like that are very annoying. Annoying, because this is not actually
the highest salary an engineer can make, but the highest salaries reported.
The word "can" is used in the wrong fashion.

------
bsaul
it seems that just like with any other market, scarcity dictates the price.
however, aiming at being the ultimate specialist of a little known piece of
technology is a very risky bet.

~~~
gozur88
On the other hand, you don't have to make $500k+ for too many years before
employment just isn't a big concern any more. Rumor is that's what you can
make as an expert in image processing.

~~~
bsaul
Indeed, but it does probably takes a bit of time before you're proficient
enough to be worth that amount. Plus, the time you spend working with this
tech, is also a time during which you're most likely not learning something
new.

------
vjeux
For the higher compensations, the large of it is stock bonus. Unlike base pay,
it's hard to count annually for a few reasons:

\- They usually vest over four years with a one year cliff.

\- The big grants are given sporadically to reward something, not on a
recurring basis.

\- For stocks like Facebook which are highly volatile (x7 in 5 years) it
depends on when you are being given / selling it.

------
gigatexal
And people wonder why everyone wants into the industry... alas it's top talent
that command these salaries, I'm far from there. Qureshi's story is a fun one
I've heard him talk about it on the Software Engineering Daily podcast.
Knowing how to negotiate well and being a talented engineer can go a long
ways.

------
milesf
Why don't you follow this software developer's advice who also happens to be
earning millions a year?
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CDXJ6bMkMY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CDXJ6bMkMY)

------
krystiangw
$400k as a developer is the best I found:

[https://jobsquery.it/jobs;page=1;tags=;sortBy=SALARY_DESC;qu...](https://jobsquery.it/jobs;page=1;tags=;sortBy=SALARY_DESC;query=;location=)

:)

------
pathikrit
I know someone in high-frequency trading who makes $150,000 and a bonus
between $1m-$2m each year

------
pzh
Does anyone know of any remote companies that pay even at the lowest end of
this range?

------
ta_googler
Strictly answering the question posed: O(100M) USD. (evidence: all the "first
engineers" at AmaGooFaceSoftFlix).

If you are above average but not super smart, willing to put in hard work and
have normal interpersonal skills (i.e. not being a total jerk, know how to
talk to groups, know how to write effectively etc), here is how you can be a
millionaire in 10 years:

1 year: Practice super hard for tech interviews. They are notoriously
difficult, but all you need is good understanding of the best reference book
for {Algorithms, Data structures, Computer Architecture, Operating Systems,
Databases}; which is basically what they teach you in undergrad CS. Online,
you will find plenty of "how to crack google interview" links. Then apply to a
few small companies as "warmup exercise". Finally, apply to all the big names
AmaGooFaceSoftFlix in high-salary area (SV, Seattle, NYC) and get in one of
them.

next 9 years:

1\. Give your best in the first 3-4 years. If your group is bad (mainly due to
bad manager), suck it up - you can easily switch teams in most big companies
within 18-24 months.

2\. Aim for promotion every couple of years. Find senior people who are
friendly, make friends with them (plenty of opportunities to hang out socially
in your early years), ask them career advice from time to time etc. With this
strategy, you will be E5 in FB or Senior S/W Engg in Google (or equivalent) in
~4-5 years. This level pays ~250-300K in Salary + Bonus + Stocks. Previous 2
levels should pay 150-170K and 200-230K.

3\. Don't get daunted by "high cost of living" memes. If you are at a big
company on a good trajectory, you can easily afford it in SV/Seattle/NYC.

4\. Out of your total earnings, allocate 25-30% for taxes, 30-35% for living
expenses, rest for savings (preferably 401K, Roth IRA via backdoors etc) in
low cost index funds.

5\. Beyond a certain level, either you will need a bit of interpersonal
(political?) skills or super smart chops in some specific area to grow
further. But decent knowledge of some stack plus hard work can get you to next
level within next 2-3 years, at which point it starts paying really well -
>400K, bulk of which is from stock grants.

After 10 years, your savings will nicely grow nicely close to 1M USD. If you
have have purchased house, your home equity may replace some of the liquid net
worth.

Disclaimers:

1\. I assume ability to work in the US

2\. I am not counting for outliers in either direction (some folks become
director+ in 10 years, some folks languish).

3\. I am basing this on my own experience and that of many of my friends.
Again, we were lucky to work during a period of tech boom, cheap money,
amazing stock rally etc etc. Who know what next 10 years will be.... but
again, life is not that fragile either.

4\. IANAL, IANACPA, yada yada...

------
mikehines
∞

