That seems like a bad incentive. If someone had a debt to the IRS or a bad divorce and needed the extra money, do you want them to start taking moonshoots with their companies? You want them to do right by their companies not themselves.

Already with performance based compensation you have the problem with rewarding executives with the general market as opposed to their own performance. I mean, potentially Jensen Huang is terrible at his job and Nvidia is only making half of the money it should but the AI boom is covering for it.

100% performance means no one would man the ship of a failing company trying to correct the course.

Yes, provided the performance is sustainable rather than making a number this qtr or next.

Why? That just incentivizes the wrong things.