Should You Worry About Bank First Corporation's (NASDAQ:BFC) CEO Pay?

January 18, 2020

Mike Molepske has been the CEO of Bank First Corporation (NASDAQ:BFC) since 2008. This analysis aims first to contrast CEO compensation with other companies that have similar market capitalization. After that, we will consider the growth in the business. Third, we'll reflect on the total return to shareholders over three years, as a second measure of business performance. This method should give us information to assess how appropriately the company pays the CEO.

Check out our latest analysis for Bank First

How Does Mike Molepske's Compensation Compare With Similar Sized Companies?

Our data indicates that Bank First Corporation is worth US$473m, and total annual CEO compensation was reported as US$929k for the year to December 2018. While we always look at total compensation first, we note that the salary component is less, at US$425k. When we examined a selection of companies with market caps ranging from US$200m to US$800m, we found the median CEO total compensation was US$1.7m.

A first glance this seems like a real positive for shareholders, since Mike Molepske is paid less than the average total compensation paid by similar sized companies. However, before we heap on the praise, we should delve deeper to understand business performance.

The graphic below shows how CEO compensation at Bank First has changed from year to year.

NasdaqCM:BFC CEO Compensation, January 19th 2020

Is Bank First Corporation Growing?

Bank First Corporation has increased its earnings per share (EPS) by an average of 20% a year, over the last three years (using a line of best fit). It achieved revenue growth of 3.6% over the last year.

This demonstrates that the company has been improving recently. A good result. It's nice to see a little revenue growth, as this is consistent with healthy business conditions. It could be important to check this free visual depiction of what analysts expect for the future.

Has Bank First Corporation Been A Good Investment?

Most shareholders would probably be pleased with Bank First Corporation for providing a total return of 108% over three years. This strong performance might mean some shareholders don't mind if the CEO were to be paid more than is normal for a company of its size.

In Summary...

It appears that Bank First Corporation remunerates its CEO below most similar sized companies.

Since the business is growing, many would argue this suggests the pay is modest. And given most shareholders are probably very happy with recent returns, you might even think that Mike Molepske deserves a raise! Most shareholders like to see a modestly paid CEO combined with strong performance by the company. The cherry on top would be if company insiders are buying shares with their own money. CEO compensation is one thing, but it is also interesting to check if the CEO is buying or selling Bank First (free visualization of insider trades).

Arguably, business quality is much more important than CEO compensation levels. So check out this free list of interesting companies, that have HIGH return on equity and low debt.

If you spot an error that warrants correction, please contact the editor at editorial-team@simplywallst.com. This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. Simply Wall St has no position in the stocks mentioned.

We aim to bring you long-term focused research analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Thank you for reading.

mitchell_lawler

A landmark settlement is meant to punish Meta (META). If the 1998 tobacco deal is any guide, it might protect it.

zoe_vi5fn11h

Any moat with an opt-out clause for your competitors is just a fence around your own garden.

connor_iwn1g11h

Worth looking at what previous legal action actually did to Meta rather than reaching for tobacco. The FTC's record five billion dollar privacy fine in 2019 was met with the stock rising, because it came in below fears and removed an open question. GDPR was designed to constrain large platforms and increased their share of the European ad market, because compliance cost fell hardest on small intermediaries. The FTC's antitrust case, the one that could genuinely have broken the company up, was decided in Meta's favour last November. The only thing that ever meaningfully hurt the business was Apple changing a tracking default, and Meta out-spent that too, while the ad-tech firms that could not afford to rebuild disappeared. The pattern is not that Meta survives regulation. It is that regulation keeps costing its smaller competitors more.