Relative total shareholder return: perfect or imperfect measure?
By Katharine Turner and Tamsin Sridhara There has been some discussion in the U.S. recently about the advantages of performance-based incentive plans that use relative total shareholder return (TSR) as the primary measure. Some clients have asked us to model how such a program might work as a replacement for a more traditional mix of equity grants with other long-term performance measures. The results of these modeling exercises can be instructive in presenting the various strengths and weaknesses of relative TSR programs for each company’s specific industry and circumstances. We wanted to share with you our experience in the U.K., where long-term incentive programs with relative TSR measures are very common. First, however, it’s important to clarify what we are talking about. The way a relative TSR measure normally works is that (a) a company identifies a suitable comparator group and performance period; (b) a total return figure is calculated for each company at the start and at the end of the period; and (c) executives are rewarded depending on the extent to which t
