Fully 56% of the 126 industry executives surveyed by Money Management Executive in its second annual compensation survey said they are either somewhat satisfied or very satisfied with their pay bonuses and other incentives.
That is down substantially from a year ago. In the first survey 77% of those surveyed said they were somewhat satisfied satisfied or very satisfied with their earnings capacity.
Among the sources of dissatisfaction: Base compensation that has stalled while cost of living has increased a lack of stock options or other non cash incentives and a sense that pay is unfairly distributed within a given fund organization. And, perhaps most pointedly, unnecessary caps on compensation.
"I am better paid than most but should be paid more,'' says one Chicago executive. "There should be no caps on compensation even for non revenue generating positions.''
Notably only about 10% of those that were satisfied with their compensation said that their pay is based on their own results and effort.
The greatest satisfaction-28%-came from respondents who felt their pay stacked up well against industry norms These were individuals who felt their firms appropriately weighed pay and other forms of compensation and treated them fairly.
The second most satisfaction came when a person felt fairly compensated "relative to others in my same position.''
Not surprisingly, the greatest dissatisfaction-22%-came when individuals felt they were not being compensated in a competitive way. And another 19% felt they were not being paid well relative to others in the industry.
A fair amount of dissatisfaction was expressed by those who felt their companies did not have adequate growth potential.
One Minneapolis manager says his numbers are "stale with limited growth potential and are not based primarily on my specific role and responsibilities'' creating dissatisfaction.
The level of pay appears to be expanding at the middle of compensation ranges but not at the low or high ends.
For instance, 6% of respondents said they were making $75 or less four years ago. But only 7% are in that range now.
Similarly only 2% of respondents say they are making $3 or more. But 5 % say they were making $300,000 or more four years ago.
Another 9% say they were making between $150,000 to $200,000 but a full 5% say they were making such compensation four years ago.
"New hires with less experience receive similar compensation and bonus,'' reported one Milwaukee manager.
Bonuses for that matter appear relatively static. Last year 9% of respondents reported getting bonuses equal to 5% or less of their base pay. Only 25% were in that range this year.
But last year, 24% said they were getting bonuses that were between 6% and 20% of their base pay. That went up slightly this year to 5% or less of their pay.
Those getting bonuses equal to half their base pay or more went down only slightly as well from 21% to 20%.
Four years ago, 23% were getting bonuses in that range by their own report. Another 25% were in the 6% to 20% range. And 28% were getting bonuses equal to 5% or less of their base pay.
Most respondents reported getting more basic forms of added compensation.
Nearly two thirds (65%) reported that they got some sort of matching funding from their companies for money they put into their 401(k) retirement plans.
Another 63% said they received four or more weeks of vacation.
But only 34% said they shared in the profits of the firms they worked for. Another 5% said they got deferred compensation of some sort and 7% said they got restricted stock grants.
Similarly to 2011, only 2% said they had some sort of allowance for the use of a private jet.
But 10% said they had no deductible health insurance and another 13% reported receiving 100% health coverage tuition and daycare.
Roughly 28% expected to receive payments from defined contribution plans. And another 3% said they were slated to receive straight forward pension payments.
In a sign of the increasingly mobile and electronic times 45%, though, did report that they could "work at home when needed.''
Responses differed sometimes widely by firm size or age.
For instance, 24% of respondents from firms with 49 or fewer employees reported that they were satisfied with their compensation. Why? Because they owned the company.
By contrast, not a single respondent from a firm with 5,000 or more employees cited that circumstance as a cause for satisfaction.