Bitcoin Miners' Executive Pay Surges 118% to $14.4 Million in 2024

Executives at US-listed Bitcoin mining firms are taking home pay packages far larger than their peers in energy and IT. Equity-heavy compensation structures are driving up totals and drawing increasing shareholder resistance, according to new findings from VanEck.

Across eight miners that VanEck reviewed – Bit Digital, Cipher Mining, CleanSpark, Core Scientific, Hut 8, Marathon Digital, Riot Platforms, and TeraWulf – executive pay averaged $14.4 million in 2024. This is more than double the previous year’s $6.6 million, and significantly above averages in the energy and technology sectors. Such a surge has occurred even as base salaries for mining executives remain broadly in line with other industries, averaging $474,000 in 2023. The primary driver is the sector’s reliance on stock-based compensation, which accounted for 89% of miner executive pay in 2024, compared to lower allocations in comparable sectors.

While stock-based incentives can align management with investors, VanEck’s analysis indicates many miners continue to structure these awards with short- to medium-term vesting, limited performance gating, and dilution risks that erode shareholder value. Shareholders appear to be pushing back. Across broader corporate America, nearly 99% of executive pay proposals passed during the 2024 proxy season, while S&P 500 and Russell 3000 companies typically witness 90% or higher support rates. By contrast, Bitcoin miners saw an average support rate of just 64%.

Six of the eight miners, including Riot, Core Scientific, Hut 8, Cipher, TeraWulf, and Marathon, have expanded the use of performance stock units (PSUs). These typically vest over multiple years, tied to share price or total shareholder return benchmarks. Marathon has transitioned fully to PSUs in 2025, and Cipher now uses a 50/50 split between restricted stock units and PSUs. Core Scientific reintroduced its long-term incentive plan with performance-linked stock after reorganization. These changes indicate a move away from purely time-based vesting and toward longer-term alignment, although not all firms have fully adopted these practices. CleanSpark, for one, has not implemented PSUs. The same is true for Bit Digital as well. Despite authorizing them, it has yet to issue them according to its latest filings.

The question of whether these pay structures are delivering value remains. VanEck’s comparison of total executive pay with each miner’s 2024 market-cap growth shows stark contrasts. At TeraWulf and Core Scientific, executive pay amounted to around 2% of the firms’ market-cap increases. This pointed to relatively efficient pay-for-performance alignment. On the other hand, Riot’s executives received $230 million, which is equivalent to 73% of the company’s 2024 market-cap gains, while Marathon’s executive pay was 18% of its market-cap growth. Such disparities have drawn scrutiny, particularly given Riot’s history of shareholder pushback on pay proposals and concerns over dilution tied to expanding equity compensation plans.

Bitcoin mining has become a lucrative business, with top executives reaping significant financial rewards. However, this success has sparked discontent among investors who feel that the profits are not being fairly distributed. The disparity between the earnings of mining executives and the returns seen by investors has become a contentious issue, with some investors expressing frustration over the lack of transparency and the perceived inequity in the distribution of profits. The mining industry has seen a surge in profitability, driven by the increasing value of Bitcoin and the efficiency of mining operations. Executives at the helm of these operations have capitalized on this trend, accumulating substantial wealth. However, investors who have backed these mining ventures are increasingly vocal about their dissatisfaction. They argue that while the executives are enjoying substantial financial gains, the returns on their investments have not been commensurate with the risks they have taken.

The situation has led to calls for greater transparency and accountability within the mining industry. Investors are demanding more detailed financial disclosures and a clearer understanding of how profits are being allocated. They also want assurances that their investments are being managed in a way that maximizes returns and minimizes risks. The growing discontent highlights the need for a more equitable distribution of profits and a greater focus on investor interests. The mining industry's success has also raised questions about the sustainability of the current model. With the increasing competition and the rising costs of mining operations, there are concerns about the long-term viability of the industry. Investors are calling for a more sustainable approach that balances profitability with environmental and social responsibilities. They are also urging mining companies to invest in research and development to improve the efficiency of their operations and reduce their environmental impact. The situation underscores the need for a more balanced approach to the distribution of profits in the mining industry. While executives have a right to be rewarded for their efforts, it is also important to ensure that investors are fairly compensated for their investments. The growing discontent among investors highlights the need for a more transparent and equitable distribution of profits, as well as a greater focus on sustainability and long-term viability. The industry must address these concerns to maintain investor confidence and ensure its continued success.