commit fbb2d7dbcab7e0f75bedbd7e01ad3a724a43e2c9 Author: tracyfxs414559 Date: Thu Aug 21 23:32:05 2025 +0800 Add 'Intended Value Vs FMV: should you Care?' diff --git a/Intended-Value-Vs-FMV%3A-should-you-Care%3F.md b/Intended-Value-Vs-FMV%3A-should-you-Care%3F.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..09a79e0 --- /dev/null +++ b/Intended-Value-Vs-FMV%3A-should-you-Care%3F.md @@ -0,0 +1,58 @@ +
When the Comp Committee approves an RSU grant, the number of shares is typically based on an intended value divided by a price formula, such as the 20[-trading-day average](https://elixirimmobilier.com) [closing](https://www.minnieleerealtyllc.com) price. But when the grant is recorded, the fair market value ("FMV") reflects the closing price that day.
+
As a result, the intended value set by the compensation team varies from the [fair market](https://inmobiliariasantander.com.mx) value recorded.
+
Should you care?
+
Most comp leaders would say yes - we should stick to intended value because that methodology aligns with how we set targets.
+
But how much does it really vary, and when does it matter?
+
I experimented with analyzing stock data from 10 public companies to find out. And the answer is, as every consultant says, it depends:
+
- SBC expense and RSU budgets - yes, you should care, especially for the annual refresh grants +
- Employee expectations - yes, if your stock is highly volatile +
- Market data methodology - no, the variance is de minimis +

+
Analysis of 10 companies in 2024 YTD
+
I looked at 10 tech companies in the data security industry to see how big the gap gets:
+
- Cloudflare, Crowdstrike, Datadog, F5, Fortinet, Okta, SentinelOne, Snowflake, Twilio, and [ZScaler](https://impactrealtygroup.net) +
+I picked this group of stocks because they were highly volatile in 2024, maximizing differences between FMV and intended value:
+
Using historical stock price data from NASDAQ, I built an analysis of year-to-date (through November 20th) variance in the 20-day average closing price (Intended) and actual closing price (FMV) for each company, then assumed a grant date on the start of each month.
+
Here are the results:
+
This analysis shows that most of the time the [variance](https://haphicraft.com) between FMV and intended value was minimal - 70% of all observations were less than +/-5%.
+
The average variance for all events was -0.76%, and in absolute terms was 4.50%.
+
But in any given month, the difference can get pretty big, like Snowflake at -15.93% in March, or Twilio at 18.66% in November. 7 out of 10 companies had at least one grant date month where the difference was greater than 10%.
+
So does this variance between fair market value and intended value matter for comp?
+
Let’s start by looking at everyone’s favorite topic right now: SBC expense.
+
SBC expense and RSU budgets - you should care
+
If your stock has a big swing before you make a large set of grants, like getting your annual refresh grants approved, then FMV versus intended value can cause big headaches.
+
For an illustrative example, take Okta - imagine they granted their refresh grants on March 1, 2024, when the 20-day average closing price was $87.24 and the fair market value price was $108.49.
+
This is a windfall for employees (more on that later), but it’s a problem for the CFO.
+
Let’s say they [intended](https://dasseygeneralgroup.com) to spend $150 million that day, an average refresh grant of about $25k for their 6,000 employees. Since the FMV was 24% higher, their SBC expense recognized over the total vesting period will reflect closer to $186 million, for a difference of +$36 million. 😱
+
Notice the stock volatility impacts your [RSU budget](https://easynestproperties.com) and share dilution, too. In this illustrative example, sticking with the 20-day average closing price results in spending 1.72 million shares, whereas the FMV implies spending 1.38 million shares, 20% fewer.
+
Philosophical aside: if the gap between a 20-day average closing price and the FMV is big - which methodology do you think more closely reflects "intended" value?
+
If I’m spending an extra $36 million in SBC expense and an extra 340,000 shares, I hope I’m doing it intentionally…
+
So if you have a big list of grant approvals at your next Comp Committee meeting and your stock price has shot up in the last month, you better have a conversation with your CFO first.
+
[Employee expectations](https://aaronguglani.com) - yes, it matters
+
If your stock price suddenly changes, employees can get a big windfall (or haircut) on the day of the grant.
+
For example, if you joined Crowdstrike in August, you might be a little annoyed: the stock dropped 43% over the previous 20 trading days, resulting in a FMV 28.6% lower than the 20-day trading average. Meaning, if you were promised a $100k new hire grant in your offer letter, you got 318 RSUs now worth only $71k.
+
Whether your comp team wants to remediate that unlucky timing is a question of compensation philosophy and talent strategy. But every team should at least be prepared for a surge of complaints from unhappy employees who received a fraction of what they expected, despite the language they signed in their offer letter.
+
Can’t help myself - gotta raise my philosophical aside again: if the gap between 20-day average and FMV results in a 29% haircut for employees that month… which valuation feels more "intended"?
+
Market data methodology - not much 🤷
+
For individual companies and [specific](https://samuivillanow.com) grants, FMV versus intended value can vary meaningfully when your stock price is [volatile](https://www.eastpointeny.com).
+
But in aggregate, it appears de minimis.
+
The average FMV/Intended variance across these 10 companies’ 2024 grant dates is 4.50% in [absolute](https://pennyrealtors.witorbit.com) terms, but it washes out to -0.76% taking into account positive and negative swings.
+
That’s a rounding error.
+
Consider the variance compared to the difference in market percentile for a P4 software engineer:
+
- 50th new hire grant is $300k +
- 75th percentile is $450k +
- A grant 4.5% higher than the median interpolates to the 52nd percentile +
+50th versus 52nd percentile is pretty uninteresting.
+
Target vs actual - the real conversation
+
I get why we want to use intended value for stock comp benchmarking:
+
- It reflects target value, [paralleling construction](https://realzip.com.au) with target bonus so we can build up to a target TDC +
- It reflects policy when we use market data to construct ranges +
- We’re used to getting our data this way, and it needs to be apples-to-apples +
+But the real conversation about stock comp is the actual value the employee experiences: realized value and current unvested value.
+
Realized value: the vested amount that shows up on your W2 - am I making more money this year than last year? +
[Current unvested](https://my-holidaylettings.uk) value: the value of all unvested shares at today’s price - do I have more unvested stock than what I could get by moving to a competitor? +
+Whether an [employee feels](https://commercialproperty.im) valued and whether you’re protected against attrition are the outcomes of your compensation strategy. I think most comp teams give this far too little attention, mostly because it’s historically been hard to analyze.
[google.com](https://support.google.com/maps/thread/242643915/why-has-my-house-suddenly-been-blurred-out-on-street-view?hl=en) \ No newline at end of file