Updated April 2026 · SEC DEF 14A data
ConocoPhillips vs EOG Resources, CEO Pay Comparison
Ryan Lance, ConocoPhillips's CEO, earns $4.0M more in reported total compensation than Ezra Yacob at EOG Resources, based on the most recent SEC DEF 14A proxy filings. ConocoPhillips earns a Pay-for-Performance Grade of B; EOG Resources earns a C.
Ryan Lance at ConocoPhillips ($12.0M) and Ezra Yacob at EOG Resources ($8.0M) are close on total compensation. With pay close, the more interesting comparison is on performance: TSR ran 4.0% versus -8.7% over the three-year window.
CEO compensation comparisons require peer-group context. Compensation committees explicitly select peer groups for setting CEO pay; two companies may use different peer groups even when they appear in similar industries. The full per-company pages surface the disclosed peer-group context.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ConocoPhillipsCOP | EOG ResourcesEOG |
|---|---|---|
| CEO | Ryan Lance | Ezra Yacob |
| Industry | Oil & Gas | Oil & Gas |
| Total Compensation | $12.0M | $8.0M |
| Base Salary | $1.2M | $800K |
| Stock Awards | $6.0M | $4.0M |
| Option Awards | $1.4M | $960K |
| Non-Equity Incentive | $1.8M | $1.2M |
| Pay-for-Performance Grade | B (66/100) | C (59/100) |
| CEO-Worker Pay Ratio | 100:1 | 67:1 |
| Median Worker Pay | $120K | $120K |
| Say-on-Pay Approval | 90.1% | 94.3% |
| 3yr Total Shareholder Return | +4.0% | -8.7% |
| Revenue | $56.0B | $23.2B |
| Market Cap | $130.0B | $70.0B |
| Employees | 10,100 | 2,850 |
Reading the Comparison
Ryan Lance (ConocoPhillips) earns $4.0M more than Ezra Yacob (EOG Resources) — a meaningful gap reflecting both pay-package design and the size of the most recent equity grant under FASB ASC 718 grant-date fair value accounting.
On Pay-for-Performance Grade, ConocoPhillips edges EOG Resources 66/100 (B) to 59/100 (C). The 7-point gap usually reflects one or two factors moving in opposite directions — typically say-on-pay vote share or relative TSR.
CEO-to-worker pay ratios are similar: 100:1 at ConocoPhillips versus 67:1 at EOG Resources. Both companies have median worker pay structures that produce comparable Item 402(u) ratios. EOG Resources's pay package received 94.3% shareholder approval, ahead of ConocoPhillips's 90.1%. Both votes are above the 70% scrutiny threshold but the 4.2-point gap indicates somewhat different shareholder views on pay structure.
How These Numbers Are Sourced
Every metric in the comparison table comes from a primary public source. Total compensation, salary, stock awards, option awards, and non-equity incentive figures come from the Summary Compensation Table of each company's most recent DEF 14A — the table the SEC requires every U.S. public company to file annually under Regulation S-K Item 402. CEO-to-worker pay ratio comes from the Item 402(u) disclosure required since 2018. Say-on-pay vote share comes from the 8-K filed within four business days of each annual meeting. 3-year total shareholder return is computed from split-adjusted, dividend-reinvested price data over the most recent 36 months.
The Pay-for-Performance Grade is the four-factor composite documented at methodology: relative TSR (35%), revenue versus compensation growth (25%), say-on-pay vote (25%), and pay ratio versus peers (15%). Authoritative governance frameworks come from Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) and Glass Lewis. Underlying SEC filings for both ConocoPhillips and EOG Resources are available on the EDGAR system.
Frequently Asked Questions
How much do the CEOs of ConocoPhillips and EOG Resources earn?
Ryan Lance, CEO of ConocoPhillips, earned $12.0M in reported total compensation in the most recently disclosed fiscal year. Ezra Yacob at EOG Resources earned $8.0M. Both figures come from the Summary Compensation Table inside each company's most recent DEF 14A proxy statement.
Which company has better Pay-for-Performance alignment?
On Pay-for-Performance Grade, ConocoPhillips edges EOG Resources 66/100 (B) to 59/100 (C). The 7-point gap usually reflects one or two factors moving in opposite directions — typically say-on-pay vote share or relative TSR. The grade is computed from a four-factor composite: 3-year relative TSR (35%), revenue versus compensation growth (25%), say-on-pay vote (25%), and CEO-to-worker pay ratio versus peers (15%).
How do CEO-to-worker pay ratios compare?
ConocoPhillips reports a CEO-to-median-worker pay ratio of 100:1 on its most recent Item 402(u) disclosure; EOG Resources reports 67:1. CEO-to-worker pay ratios are similar: 100:1 at ConocoPhillips versus 67:1 at EOG Resources. Both companies have median worker pay structures that produce comparable Item 402(u) ratios.
Did shareholders approve each pay package?
EOG Resources's pay package received 94.3% shareholder approval, ahead of ConocoPhillips's 90.1%. Both votes are above the 70% scrutiny threshold but the 4.2-point gap indicates somewhat different shareholder views on pay structure. Say-on-pay is an advisory vote required by Section 951 of the Dodd-Frank Act and conducted at each annual shareholder meeting.
Where does this comparison data come from?
Every figure on this page is sourced from public SEC filings: the DEF 14A proxy statement for compensation under Regulation S-K Item 402, the same proxy's Item 402(u) disclosure for pay ratio, the 8-K filed within four business days of each annual meeting for say-on-pay vote share, and the 10-K for revenue, market cap, and employee count. All filings are available on the SEC EDGAR system at https://www.sec.gov/edgar.shtml.
ConocoPhillips CEO Pay Details
Full compensation breakdown, history, and peer comparison
EOG Resources CEO Pay Details
Full compensation breakdown, history, and peer comparison
Source: U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, DEF 14A and 8-K filings via EDGAR. Public domain.
Last updated 2026-04-06 · comparing ConocoPhillips (COP) and EOG Resources (EOG).