Where to Look for Answers: A Private Company’s Guide to Equity Compensation Market Data

Equity compensation is one of the most valuable — and complicated — parts of the total rewards mix for private companies. Unlike salary, which can be benchmarked with abundant public data, equity award sizes are opaque, context-specific, and closely tied to company stage and valuation.

That’s why benchmarking equity compensation is so critical. Without reliable market data, companies risk:

• Under-granting, leading to missed hires or employee attrition.
• Over-granting, causing excessive dilution and investor pushback.
• Misaligning, where practices don’t match market expectations.

Fortunately, a growing ecosystem of surveys, platforms, and advisory resources exists to help. This article explores the key tools private companies use to benchmark equity, how they work, and the pros and cons of each.

Core Resources for Equity Compensation Benchmarking

Radford McLagan Compensation Database (Aon)

What It Provides: Comprehensive equity & pay benchmarking surveys; data by role/function, geography, stage; includes new-hire equity, refresh, equity eligibility, etc.

Best For / Stage Fit: Later-stage private / pre-IPO companies; tech / biotech especially.

Strengths: Large sample size; trusted by boards & investors; good job-level and function coverage; global reach.

Additional Considerations: Premium pricing reflects the depth and quality of data; updates are periodic, which may be less ideal in rapidly changing markets; better suited to mid- or later-stage companies.

Pricing / Comment: Pricing varies based on company size, role scope, and geographic coverage; quotes are available upon request.

Pave

What It Provides: Real-time compensation benchmarks for all elements of pay-including base salaries, variable cash pay, equity awards, and unvested equity holdings-based on automated and persistent connections to HRIS, cap table, equity management, and applicant tracking platforms at 8,500+ organizations.

Best For / Stage Fit: Private companies at all stages of development, especially in the artificial intelligence (AI), consumer software, enterprise software, FinTech, and HealthTech industries / Expansion into the biotechnology and financial services industries is underway.

Strengths: Very large dataset; modern UI; supports 30+ integrations; includes burn rate and equity practice benchmarks; eliminates the need for annual Excel-based survey submissions; provides fully automated job matching powered by AI.

Additional Considerations: Global coverage includes 50+ countries and 90+ cities and metros, but dataset is strongest in Australia, Canda, India, the United Kingdom, and the United States; full value of integrations with Pave is realized when market pricing, compensation planning, and total rewards portal workflows are purchased

Pricing / Comment: Free benchmarking data is available through Pave's "Market Data Launch" offering, but access to benchmarks is limited to two (2) markets the overall U.S. and one additional market of your choice. Access to benchmarks in all markets, plus advanced tools such as Offer Insights, Advanced Equity Insights, and Geographic Differentials, are included in Pave's paid offering, called "Market Data Pro."

J. Thelander Consulting

What It Provides: Real-time / near-real-time compensation + equity benchmarking based on member provided survey data; includes equity grant data and compensation information by geographic region and job title/role.

Best For / Stage Fit: Seed-to-Growth / mid-stage tech and life sciences companies; companies looking for real-time / data for equity & total comp.

Strengths: Large sample set that only includes private companies.  Ability to search by series of funding, geography and specific role.  Access to base version is free with survey participation.

Additional Considerations: Primarily focused on earlier-stage and executive-level data; coverage may be more limited for later-stage companies.

Pricing / Comment: Full feature access is available through a paid subscription.

Carta (Carta Total Compensation)

What It Provides: Equity + salary benchmarking with real-time data, job leveling; equity benchmarks tied to actual cap table / 409A practices; helpful for modelling equity grants to manage dilution.

Best For / Stage Fit: Startups / high growth companies, especially those using Carta for their cap table; useful for early / mid-stage where equity grants are frequent.

Strengths: Data based on real companies’ cap tables; good alignment with actual equity values; integrated tools for job leveling etc.

Additional Considerations: Coverage is strongest within its customer base; certain roles or unique equity structures may not align perfectly; pricing and access may depend on platform participation or data sharing.

Pricing / Comment: Pricing is typically tiered and based on company size; demonstrations and custom quotes are available upon request.

Willis Towers Watson (WTW)

What It Provides: Global compensation surveys, total rewards benchmarking (salary, bonus, incentives, equity in many cases).

Best For / Stage Fit: Large / mid-size companies with global operations; companies in regulated industries, or where external comparables are needed.

Strengths: Trusted methodology; strong geographic breadth; good for comparing senior / executive roles; good analytics tools.

Additional Considerations: Premium pricing; interface and performance may reflect a more traditional design; access to equity-specific or niche role data may require consulting services or advanced tiers; data updates occur periodically.

Pricing / Comment: Pricing details are typically not public and may be higher for full survey access.

Mercer Surveys

What It Provides: Similar to WTW: Pay surveys + total rewards + equity benchmarking in regions / industries; includes senior/executive, global roles etc.

Best For / Stage Fit: Companies with global footprint; PE-backed; mid to large enterprise scale

Strengths: Accurate, trusted; many industries; strong global coverage; ability to do custom benchmarking; strong for board reporting / governance.

Additional Considerations: Premium cost structure; coverage may be more suited to mid- and later-stage companies; consulting support can enhance access to detailed equity insights; data refresh frequency may vary by region.

Pricing / Comment: Pricing is provided through custom quotes based on region, role scope, and company size; typically positioned at a premium level.

Pearl Meyer

What It Provides: Specializes more on executive compensation, equity plan structuring, benchmarking at higher levels (C-suite, directors).

Best For / Stage Fit: Later-stage private, pre-IPO, or companies with significant board / governance oversight; when competitive executive pay is important.

Strengths: Depth of expertise; strong insight into executive equity awards; good for benchmarking highly compensated persons (HCPs).

Additional Considerations: Primarily focused on executive and leadership roles; pricing reflects the depth of expertise provided; detailed coverage for individual contributor levels may be limited; customized analyses are often available for specialized needs.

Pricing / Comment: Custom consulting engagement typically.

Law Firms & Advisory “White Papers / Reports” (e.g. from Cooley, Fenwick, Wilson Sonsini, etc.)

What It Provides: Specific reports on startup equity trends, ESOP practices, executive compensation for pre-IPOs, etc.

Best For / Stage Fit: Private companies planning IPO or fresh fundraising; companies wanting policy or plan changes; high growth startups.

Strengths: Often free or lower cost; provides qualitative insight; includes custom case studies; good for seeing what others are doing; useful to complement survey data.

Additional Considerations: May not provide deep statistical analysis or fully up-to-date data; role-level detail can vary; it’s important to review sample relevance to ensure alignment with your company’s profile.

Peer / Industry Networking / VC Portfolio Data

What It Provides: Data from companies in your peer network or from VC firms’ portfolio of companies; internal “secret sauce” benchmarks.

Best For / Stage Fit: Especially useful for companies in venture ecosystems; can provide highly relevant, recent data; good for sanity checking what surveys say.

Strengths: Very relevant in terms of stage / industry; may give early signal of new grant practices or emerging norms; more flexibility; often cheaper or no cost; can inform policy, not just numbers.

Additional Considerations: Data is often anecdotal and less standardized; confidentiality constraints can limit access or sample size; findings may reflect unique practices that are not broadly generalizable and are not always published.

Online Tools / Platforms (Crowdsourced or Contributor-based)

What It Provides: Sites like "Levels.fyi" (for public companies, but useful for role / level comparisons), startup forums, etc.; also HR blogs and VC blog posts with grants data (e.g. “Rewarding Talent” handbook from Index Ventures).

Best For / Stage Fit: Mainly for early benchmarking / role-level sense; more useful for data points rather than authoritative grants.

Strengths: Accessible; often free or low cost; good for seeing what others are doing in similar roles; often easy to use; good for role-level / peer comparisons.

Additional Considerations: Data quality and sample size may vary; coverage may not fully represent all geographies or company stages; equity-specific details such as vesting or dilution are sometimes limited.

Compensation Management / Total-Rewards Platforms

What It Provides: Platforms combining multiple sources: surveys, internal data, HRIS integrations, sometimes equity-specific benchmarking built in (e.g. job leveling, offer modelling, etc.).

Best For / Stage Fit: Mid to growth stage companies wanting to operationalize equity benchmarking; companies with enough headcount / roles to justify tooling.

Strengths: Helps with consistency, faster offer decisions, managing refresh programs, visualizing equity burdens, forecasting dilution; more efficient than manual Excel based benchmarking.

Additional Considerations: May involve upfront setup costs and subscription fees; data may still rely on survey sources; some platforms are less mature in equity-grant-specific features; verify coverage across roles and regions.

What to Look for When Evaluating These Platforms or Surveys

When you consider adding a resource to your benchmarking toolkit, here are questions to ask / criteria to check:

1. Stage & Industry Relevance — Does the dataset include many companies like yours (stage of funding, industry, geography)?
2. Recency / Data Refresh Frequency — How often is the data updated? Are you dealing with stale numbers?
3. Role & Level Granularity — Especially for equity, you want data by function / seniority / job level (IC, manager, director, etc.).
4. Equity Specificity — Does the data show % ownership, grant value, vehicle type (options vs RSUs), refresh grants, vesting schedules?
5. Dilution / Pool Context — Does the resource help you understand how many shares are reserved / used / diluted over time?
6. Cost / Licensing Terms — Some surveys require a paid subscription, while others offer free or contributor-exchange access.
7. Integration & Tooling — Does it integrate with your HRIS / cap table / payroll systems? Does it provide dashboards, offer modelling, etc.?
8. Transparency & Sample Size — How many companies / employees / data points are included? How well-documented is the methodology?

Final Thoughts

The resources for equity benchmarking have expanded dramatically in the last decade. Where once startups relied on board anecdotes or VC “rules of thumb,” today there is a sophisticated ecosystem: from traditional surveys like Radford, to real-time platforms like Pave and Carta.

But here’s the key: no single resource is enough. Smart companies combine multiple sources, align them with their equity philosophy, and use the data to tell a consistent story — to boards, to investors, and most importantly, to employees.

Ultimately, benchmarking isn’t just about numbers. It’s about credibility, fairness, and building an ownership culture that can take a private company all the way to its next stage of growth.

Looking for more insights? We’ve got you covered with helpful resources on Private Company Stock Plans.