ISS Updates Burn Rate Tables for 2014 Proxy Season

Earlier this month, Institutional Shareholder Services, the prominent corporate governance advisory services firm, updated its “burn rate” tables, which govern its voting recommendations on equity plan proposals. In recent years, burn rate levels have fluctuated significantly, making this an increasingly important area for technology and life sciences companies to monitor.

Updated Burn Rate Tables

Each year, ISS updates its burn rate tables and allowable limits for Russell 3000 and non-Russell 3000 companies for the upcoming proxy season. ISS measures “burn rate” using the total number of equity awards (stock and options) granted in a given year and expresses the computation as a percentage of the number of common shares outstanding. These tables set ISS’ acceptable burn rate levels (based on one standard deviation above the industry mean) using global industry classification standard (“GICS”) codes.

ISS’ updated 2014 burn rate tables, which apply to annual meetings of shareholders that are held on or after February 1, 2014, are set forth below.

burn rate table

Burn Rate Policy

Under ISS’ current U.S. proxy voting guidelines, it will recommend a vote “against” an equity plan proposal if the company’s average three-year burn rate exceeds the greater of:

  • the mean plus one standard deviation of the company’s GICS peer group segmented on the basis of whether or not it is in the Russell 3000; or
  • two percent of the company’s weighted common shares outstanding.

As part of its annual proxy analysis, ISS will also penalize a company that fails the burn rate test (by deducting points from its compensation score) when conducting its Quick-Score review of the company’s governance-related practices.
If a company grants both full value awards and stock options, ISS applies a premium or “multiplier” to the full value awards for the past three fiscal years to equate them economically with stock options. For 2014, this premium or “multiplier,” is unchanged from 2013 as follows:

Stock Price Volatility

Exception for Burn Rate Commitments

Where a company does not meet ISS’ applicable burn rate cap, it can avoid an “against” vote recommendation if it commits to a prospective gross three-year average burn rate equal to the higher of 2% of the company’s weighted common shares outstanding or the mean plus one standard deviation of its GICS peer group. The company’s burn rate may exceed the GICS peer group average in the first two years, as long as the prospective three-year average burn rate remains below the commitment level.

This commitment must be publicly disclosed, either in a current report on Form 8-K or in the company’s definitive proxy statement.

Observations

While ISS’ burn rate methodology remains the same as in 2013, on average the burn rate limits for companies in the Russell 3000 decreased by approximately 3%, while limits for non-Russell 3000 companies are down approximately 6%.
For technology and life sciences companies in the Russell 3000, the limits changed as follows:

  • for Software and Services, from 7.26% to 7.25%
  • for Semiconductor Equipment, from 6.58% to 6.72%
  • for Technology Hardware & Equipment, from 5.77% to 5.49%
  • for Health Care Equipment & Services, from 5.09% to 4.82%
  • for Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology, from 6.70% to 5.91%

For non-Russell 3000 technology and life sciences companies, the limits changed as follows:

  • for Software and Services, from 9.58% to 9.14%
  • for Semiconductor Equipment, from 10.55% to 9.75%
  • for Technology Hardware & Equipment, from 8.53% to 8.91%
  • for Health Care Equipment & Services, from 9.92% to 9.08%
  • for Pharmaceuticals & Biotechnology, from 10.58% to 8.98%

As part of its long-standing practice (which is intended to limit extreme fluctuations from year to year), ISS provides that annual limits cannot increase or decrease by more than 2% each year.

Companies should consider these updated limits as one factor in their annual equity strategy review. Companies that developed equity budgets for 2014 based on then-current 2013 limits may have less flexibility with their equity programs than originally anticipated (depending on program goals, equity plan funding, competitive needs, etc.).

Further Information

To obtain a copy of ISS 2014 Burn Rate Policy »

Download a pdf of this article »

Related

SEC Proposes Significant Simplification of Executive Compensation Disclosure for Most Public Companies

Download a pdf of this article » On May 19, 2026, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) proposed substantial changes to the filing categories for U.S. public company disclosure requirements. The primary intent of these changes is to reduce disclosure complexity and compliance costs to encourage more companies to go and stay public.   The proposal replaces the existing range of filer categories – large accelerated filers, accelerated filers, non-accelerated filers, smaller reporting companies and emerging growth companies – with just two: large accelerated filers and non-accelerated filers.  Non-accelerated filers, proposed as companies with a public float below $2 billion, would be eligible to follow a simplified regime akin to what is currently available to smaller reporting

Read More

At an Inflection Point: Long-Term Incentive Design Post-ISS/Glass Lewis Ascendancy

Download a pdf of this article » For more than a decade, long-term incentive programs have largely converged around a single model: a mix of restricted stock units (RSUs) and performance-based awards (primarily PSUs), with 50% or higher weighting on the PSUs. The convergence on this model was driven more by proxy advisor expectations than business strategy. Two recent developments signal a major shift toward flexibility and innovation: ISS Policy Updates: ISS’s 2026 benchmark equity mix policy now recognizes that

Read More

Updating Proxy Advisor Peer Groups Ahead of 2026 Annual Meetings

Download a pdf of this article » For companies holding annual meetings February 1, 2026 through September 15, 2026, ISS’s peer group submission window is now open, through 8 PM ET on Friday, November 21st. We anticipate Glass Lewis’s window will also open in the near future. During this period, companies can update their self-constructed compensation peer groups for use in proxy advisors’ upcoming executive pay assessments. Absent a submission, both ISS and Glass Lewis will default to the peer

Read More

Have we reached the end of standardized proxy advisor voting recommendations? The looming ISS and Glass Lewis policy shifts

Download a pdf of this article » Overview In October, Institutional Shareholder Services, Inc. (“ISS”) and Glass Lewis & Co., Inc. (“Glass Lewis”) each announced major changes to their governance research models that mark a decisive shift away from standardized “benchmark” voting recommendations, towards a broad reorientation of the proxy advisor landscape centered on investor-specific customization – a change that is consistent with investors’ diversifying views regarding compensation program design that have led to questioning legacy views regarding the effectiveness

Read More

Connect with us

Receive our periodic news and publications

"*" indicates required fields

Name*

By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive emails from us. You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact