Income Growth Rate by Profession: 10-Year BLS Data

Between May 2014 and May 2024, the median wage for financial managers climbed from $115,320 to $161,700 — a 40.2% nominal gain over a decade in which overall median wages across all occupations rose 39.2%. That near-identical growth rate across finance and the full labor market is the surprising finding: a profession often framed as a premium earner kept pace with the broad economy but didn’t dramatically outrun it. Software developers, by contrast, saw their median grow from roughly $95,000–$98,000 in 2014 (BLS OEWS, May 2014 — direct archived data) to $133,080 in 2024, a gain of approximately 36%–40% in nominal terms. Neither profession’s base salary growth looks spectacular on its own. The gap between fast and slow movers, however, runs deeper than headline numbers suggest.

The BLS OEWS is the primary data source for this analysis. It surveys approximately 1.1 million nonfarm establishments semiannually and produces median and percentile wage estimates for over 830 occupations. The May 2024 release was published by BLS on April 2, 2025 — the most current edition available. Where May 2014 archived figures are cited, they derive from BLS Economics Daily (April 2015) tabulations of the May 2014 OEWS survey and BLS Monthly Labor Review occupational projections data (December 2015).

Sources: BLS OEWS May 2024 (published April 2, 2025); BLS Economics Daily, April 2015 (May 2014 OEWS data). *Software developer 2014 median is an estimated range based on BLS archived data; the precise primary figure was not accessible via the direct BLS OEWS archived page during this research period. May 2014 median for applications software developers nationally was within $95,000–$98,000 based on the BLS MLR December 2015 projections article and state-level OES data patterns. May 2024 figure is confirmed BLS OEWS (SOC 15-1252).

What 10 Years of BLS Data Actually Shows

The simplest interpretation of a decade of OEWS data is that high-earning professions tracked roughly in line with the broad labor market. The more useful interpretation is that the professions most exposed to management layers and organizational leverage outpaced those tied to individual contributor output — and that gap matters significantly at the $150k+ level.

Computer and information systems managers posted the strongest 10-year nominal gain among the professions in this dataset: from $127,640 in May 2014 to $187,990 in May 2024, a 47.3% increase. Chief executives moved even further in nominal dollar terms — $173,320 to $262,930, up 51.7%. Both occupations involve authority over teams, budgets, or both. Marketing managers, which often functions as an individual-oriented creative leadership role at smaller organizations, grew more slowly at 34.9%, landing below the all-occupations benchmark rate of 39.3%.

For software engineer salary distribution by city, the national median figure conceals enormous spread. BLS OEWS May 2024 shows the 25th percentile for software developers at $103,050 and the 90th percentile exceeding $211,450. A developer at the 90th percentile earns roughly 1.6 times the median. That spread existed in 2014 as well — meaning that the national median growth rate, while useful as a benchmark, does not describe any individual developer’s actual trajectory. Senior-level and metro-specific compensation diverged substantially from median trends over this period, particularly in markets like San Jose and Seattle where employer concentration in high-revenue tech firms created wage premiums well above the national OEWS midpoint.

The Professions That Beat the Benchmark — and the Ones That Didn’t

Three of the seven occupations reviewed for this analysis outpaced the all-occupations 10-year nominal growth rate of 39.3%. Chief executives (+51.7%), computer and information systems managers (+47.3%), and financial managers (+40.2%) all beat the benchmark. Software developers, depending on the exact 2014 base figure used, came in at approximately even with it. Marketing managers and financial analysts came in below it.

Financial analysts — now labeled “financial and investment analysts” under the 2018 SOC revision — had a May 2024 median of $101,350. Reconstructing their 2014 baseline is complicated by the SOC reclassification; the 2014 OES median for “financial analysts” (then SOC 13-2051) was approximately $78,000–$81,000 based on BLS Economic Daily data and the May 2014 national OEWS table structure. That implies roughly 25%–30% nominal growth over 10 years — well below the all-occupations rate. The restructuring of financial analysis roles through automation, quant consolidation, and the absorption of junior analyst work by data tools likely suppressed median wage growth for this category even as top-quartile earners at major banks continued to see strong total compensation gains. The OEWS captures base salary only — it does not capture target bonus, equity grant, or benefits — which makes the financial analyst picture particularly incomplete for those in securities or investment banking contexts where non-base comp can exceed base by a substantial margin.

Understanding total compensation vs base salary is the core analytical gap in any OEWS-based 10-year comparison. The survey is methodologically precise about what it measures: straight-time gross pay, inclusive of production bonuses and commissions, but excluding overtime, severance, shift differentials, and most non-cash benefits. For occupations where equity grants and target bonuses form 30%–60% of total comp — common at senior levels in tech, finance, and consulting — nominal base salary growth understates real compensation trajectory by design.

Sources: BLS OEWS May 2024 (published April 2025); BLS Economics Daily April 2015 (May 2014 data); BLS MLR December 2015. Financial analyst 2014 figure is a range estimate per Option A methodology — the direct SOC crosswalk was unavailable for a clean point comparison due to the 2018 SOC revision. Chief executive and marketing manager 2014 figures are confirmed from BLS Economics Daily April 2015 primary source table.

The Overlooked Finding in a Decade of Wage Data

Most coverage of OEWS wage growth focuses on which professions saw the biggest percentage gains. The more diagnostic question — the one this dataset is positioned to answer — is whether high-earning professions maintained their wage premium over the all-occupations median during this period, or whether that premium compressed.

The premium held, and in some cases widened. Financial managers earned 3.25 times the all-occupations median in May 2014 ($115,320 ÷ $35,540). By May 2024, that multiple had held at 3.27 times ($161,700 ÷ $49,500). Computer and information systems managers moved from 3.59x to 3.80x. Chief executives moved from 4.88x to 5.31x. For marketing managers, the multiple declined slightly: from 3.58x in 2014 to 3.46x in 2024 — a modest compression. Software developers stayed roughly in the 2.70x–2.78x range throughout, consistent with their tracking near the benchmark growth rate.

This pattern suggests the labor market did not mean-revert high-professional salaries toward the median over this decade. The distance between $150k+ earners and the broader workforce didn’t close — in several key occupations, it grew. For anyone using BLS data to assess whether they’re underpaid, the relevant question isn’t just whether their salary grew in nominal terms, but whether their multiple of the median held or improved relative to their occupation’s 10-year trajectory.

Finluxy Compensation Percentile: Applying 10-Year Context to Your Position

The Finluxy Compensation Percentile places a stated base salary within the BLS wage distribution for the same occupation and metropolitan statistical area (MSA). For a 10-year growth analysis, this metric also frames where historical base salary figures fell within their period-specific distributions — essential context for evaluating whether a compensation package gained or lost percentile position over time.

Source: BLS OEWS May 2024 (published April 2, 2025). MSA-level percentile adjustment requires individual MSA OEWS data; BLS publishes this at bls.gov/oes. The Finluxy Compensation Percentile reflects base salary position only; total compensation percentile will differ where target bonus and equity grant are material. For detailed percentile benchmarking, see the salary benchmarking guide for $150k+ earners.

A $150,000 base salary in 2024 lands at different national percentile positions depending on occupation: roughly the 93rd percentile for all occupations combined (well above the $49,500 median), but only the 65th–70th percentile for marketing managers, and near the 50th percentile for IT systems directors. This is the key framing shift that 10-year wage data enables: understanding not just what the number is, but what it means within a specific professional distribution. The income percentile analysis for $80k, $100k, and $120k demonstrates how dramatically context shifts by comparison point.

Tech vs. Non-Tech: The Widening Management Premium

The 10-year data makes one structural shift visible that tends to be obscured in annual compensation commentary: the management premium within technology grew faster than in any other professional domain covered by OEWS. Computer and information systems managers gained 47.3% nominally — outpacing both the all-occupations rate and the financial management rate by a meaningful margin. This reflects both the compression of middle layers in corporate finance (offset by performance bonus systems OEWS doesn’t capture) and the expanding organizational scope of technology leadership, particularly post-2020.

For professionals evaluating the technology versus non-technology salary gap at the same level, the OEWS data provides one input but not the full picture. Levels.fyi — a self-reported total compensation database skewed toward senior roles at top-tier technology companies — consistently shows total compensation for senior software engineers and engineering managers at 2–3x the BLS median for the same occupation, driven by equity grants. The BLS OEWS May 2024 median for software developers is $133,080; Levels.fyi 2024 data for senior engineers at major technology firms (staff and above) ranges from $300,000 to well above $500,000 in total compensation. These are not conflicting figures — they measure different populations. OEWS covers all employers; Levels.fyi captures a specific, high-visibility subset. Understanding which distribution you’re competing in requires knowing which employer type sets your market.

For senior-level professionals evaluating equity grants as compensation components, the 10-year base salary growth data is only part of the analysis. In occupations where equity grant annualized value now routinely represents 30–100% of base, total compensation trajectory can diverge sharply from what OEWS tracks. A software developer whose base grew 38% in 10 years but who joined a high-growth employer in 2016 and received equity grants that appreciated significantly would show dramatically stronger real compensation growth than the OEWS median implies.

Practical Context for $150k+ Households

For households earning $150,000 or more, this decade of BLS data has two practical implications. First, base salary growth at the median for premium occupations has tracked closely to the broad economy — meaning real purchasing power gains from base pay alone were limited over 10 years. The Consumer Price Index rose approximately 31% between May 2014 and May 2024, which means all-occupation nominal wage growth of 39.3% barely outpaced inflation. For financial managers growing at 40.2% nominally, the real gain in purchasing power was approximately 7% over a decade — not nothing, but not wealth-building either. For marketing managers growing at 34.9% nominally, real purchasing power from base salary actually declined against CPI over the same period.

Second, the premium of high-earning occupations over the broad median held or widened — which means that individuals who successfully advanced within their occupational distribution (moving from the 50th to the 75th percentile of their profession) captured gains the national median growth rates don’t capture. The growth story for $150k+ earners over this decade is less about median wage trajectories and more about percentile advancement within a distribution that itself expanded. VP and director salary benchmarks by industry illustrate this pattern across vertical progression specifically.

Professionals benchmarking their compensation against this data should distinguish between two questions: whether their base salary grew at the rate their occupation’s median grew (a backward-looking equity check), and whether their total compensation — including target bonus, equity grant annualized value, and benefits — positions them competitively within their occupation and metro area today. The OEWS answers the first question precisely. For the second, it provides an anchor but requires supplementation with employer-specific data, firm-tier compensation benchmarks, and current market data from sources like Levels.fyi for technology roles or Radford/Aon surveys for enterprise-level positions.

Those considering career pivots informed by this data should note that the highest 10-year median growth in this analysis accrued to management roles, not individual contributor roles. Product manager salary by experience percentile and finance salary benchmarks in the $150k to $500k range both reflect this management premium — and the divergence between base and total compensation that widens further up the seniority ladder. Base salary growth is the floor. Total compensation, and where you sit in your occupation’s distribution, is the ceiling — and BLS data, while indispensable, only measures the floor.