SVPs in banks

[quek]

Hi, just a curious question.

Is it true that Senior Vice Presidents (SVP) earn between 200k and 300k SGD in banks in Singapore? Seems there is not much difference between local banks and foreign banks, and between front office non-sales and trading roles and middle / back office roles.

I was under the impression that SVPs in banking earn at least half a million dollars all-in every year.

Originally Posted by quek

Hi, just a curious question.

Is it true that Senior Vice Presidents (SVP) earn between 200k and 300k SGD in banks in Singapore? Seems there is not much difference between local banks and foreign banks, and between front office non-sales and trading roles and middle / back office roles.

I was under the impression that SVPs in banking earn at least half a million dollars all-in every year.

It is not true, SVP is 300k and above. SVP is not a joke rank that most average workers end up retiring in after 40 years of service. Only the very best make it to SVP and beyond for a cushy 10 years before retirement.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

It is not true, SVP is 300k and above. SVP is not a joke rank that most average workers end up retiring in after 40 years of service. Only the very best make it to SVP and beyond for a cushy 10 years before retirement.

hi, may i know what would most average bankers end up at? AVP / VP?

or any other in between ranks below SVP

Also, what would be the salary band for AVP and VP?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

hi, may i know what would most average bankers end up at? AVP / VP?

or any other in between ranks below SVP

Also, what would be the salary band for AVP and VP?

The average graduate bank employee will end up being a VP at his/her peak. It's obvious not everyone can become an SVP or MD because there are only a limited number of such positions, just as there's only one CEO. And this is assuming he/she doesn't get retrenched along the way.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

The average graduate bank employee will end up being a VP at his/her peak. It's obvious not everyone can become an SVP or MD because there are only a limited number of such positions, just as there's only one CEO. And this is assuming he/she doesn't get retrenched along the way.

Very true.

No worries though, as there are many VP positions to go around for the good performers. The differentiating factor is how early you make VP. Above average performers make VP in their late 30s/early 40s, where most will "languish" until retirement, slowly climbing up the VP grades every few years.

Out of these guys will be some top performers who will rise to SVP, maybe even get a shot at chairman or CEO. These guys will make SVP in their late 40s/early 50s, from there on it's a combination of luck and politics to go any higher. Let's face it, the top posts usually end up with people who are well liked by their peers.

At the other end of the spectrum you have the average performers. These guys end up floating around as AVPs during their "golden years", not too shabby as you have some subordinates, but also have to deal with bosses. It's your classic middle management - not high enough to make major decisions, yet not low enough to avoid major responsibility. Expect to be here anytime from early 30s to late 40s. With a final push you should slide into a VP role in late 40s, where you will stay until retirement.

I was a high flyer. Retired in my 40s.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Very true.

No worries though, as there are many VP positions to go around for the good performers. The differentiating factor is how early you make VP. Above average performers make VP in their late 30s/early 40s, where most will "languish" until retirement, slowly climbing up the VP grades every few years.

Out of these guys will be some top performers who will rise to SVP, maybe even get a shot at chairman or CEO. These guys will make SVP in their late 40s/early 50s, from there on it's a combination of luck and politics to go any higher. Let's face it, the top posts usually end up with people who are well liked by their peers.

At the other end of the spectrum you have the average performers. These guys end up floating around as AVPs during their "golden years", not too shabby as you have some subordinates, but also have to deal with bosses. It's your classic middle management - not high enough to make major decisions, yet not low enough to avoid major responsibility. Expect to be here anytime from early 30s to late 40s. With a final push you should slide into a VP role in late 40s, where you will stay until retirement.

thanks for this!!

in that case, how much are we looking at in terms of salary for AVP and VP (on average across different depts)?

monthly / per annum

Originally Posted by Unregistered

thanks for this!!

in that case, how much are we looking at in terms of salary for AVP and VP (on average across different depts)?

monthly / per annum

I can give a range where you guys can take as a pinch of salt.
Bringing context that we are talking about average/slightly good performer, not top performer or high flyer.

For SVP in local bank, these are some of the traits they will usually have:
1) Usually mid 40s onwards
2) Annual Package usually 230k onwards
3) Responsibilities usually covers a "big team" which the Bank defines it as important enough to have a SVP, otherwise smaller team will usually have a VP at most for Managers.

Answering to TS (quek) question, yes, typically SVP in Banks do really earn between 200-300k annual package range, which includes basic salary + bonuses + shares (if any).

Answering to some other question in this topic:

1) Usually most people stop at VP level.

2) Usually it takes about 8-10 years to reach to VP level, if not longer, depending on many factors. VP salary range is typically 140k - 190k, depending on years of experiences and portfolio handling. The salary package might include title salary which some banks gives like 1k+ for transport and allowance, which is also included in salary package. But overall package approximately 150k for people whom just got promoted to VP.

3) Usually for AVP, experience needed is about 4.5 years to 7 years will be able to obtain AVP. For annual salary package wise about 80k - 100k.

4) Salary package across department will be different. Take for example a similar years of experience of AVP in Technology department vs someone in Operations department, on average Technology department will ALWAYS earn more, but how much more it really depends.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I can give a range where you guys can take as a pinch of salt.
Bringing context that we are talking about average/slightly good performer, not top performer or high flyer.

For SVP in local bank, these are some of the traits they will usually have:
1) Usually mid 40s onwards
2) Annual Package usually 230k onwards
3) Responsibilities usually covers a "big team" which the Bank defines it as important enough to have a SVP, otherwise smaller team will usually have a VP at most for Managers.

Answering to TS (quek) question, yes, typically SVP in Banks do really earn between 200-300k annual package range, which includes basic salary + bonuses + shares (if any).

Answering to some other question in this topic:

1) Usually most people stop at VP level.

2) Usually it takes about 8-10 years to reach to VP level, if not longer, depending on many factors. VP salary range is typically 140k - 190k, depending on years of experiences and portfolio handling. The salary package might include title salary which some banks gives like 1k+ for transport and allowance, which is also included in salary package. But overall package approximately 150k for people whom just got promoted to VP.

3) Usually for AVP, experience needed is about 4.5 years to 7 years will be able to obtain AVP. For annual salary package wise about 80k - 100k.

4) Salary package across department will be different. Take for example a similar years of experience of AVP in Technology department vs someone in Operations department, on average Technology department will ALWAYS earn more, but how much more it really depends.

I wonder if most graduate working in bank ends up at VP or AVP. Will there be a significant number of bank employees actually stuck at AVP earning upper limit of the AVP salary (around 100k to 150k)

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Answering to some other question in this topic:

1) Usually most people stop at VP level.

2) Usually it takes about 8-10 years to reach to VP level, if not longer, depending on many factors. VP salary range is typically 140k - 190k, depending on years of experiences and portfolio handling. The salary package might include title salary which some banks gives like 1k+ for transport and allowance, which is also included in salary package. But overall package approximately 150k for people whom just got promoted to VP.

3) Usually for AVP, experience needed is about 4.5 years to 7 years will be able to obtain AVP. For annual salary package wise about 80k - 100k.

4) Salary package across department will be different. Take for example a similar years of experience of AVP in Technology department vs someone in Operations department, on average Technology department will ALWAYS earn more, but how much more it really depends.

Thanks for your insights, this is very helpful.