Startup founder salaries rose modestly in FY26: 22 founders across 15 new-age technology companies received a combined ₹66.87 Cr in fixed remuneration, compared with ₹65.34 Cr in FY25. Average fixed remuneration moved from ₹2.97 Cr to ₹3.04 Cr.
That headline is useful, but incomplete. Peyush Bansal received ₹5.7 Cr in fixed pay and ₹12 Cr in bonuses and performance incentives, while Sriharsha Majety recorded ₹549.3 Cr in ESOP gains. The practical answer is to separate recurring pay, conditional cash and equity before comparing founders or designing compensation.
Founder pay becomes easier to interpret when each compensation component is measured against its own timing, conditions and relationship to company performance.
- Aggregate fixed remuneration increased 2.3%, while individual founder pay changes ranged from a 60% rise to a 34.8% decline.
- Bonuses and performance incentives can exceed fixed pay, but the reported figures do not establish whether targets were achieved.
- ESOP gains and option-grant costs require separate treatment because they do not necessarily represent cash received during the year.
Fixed pay is steady, but individual decisions differ
The aggregate number hides a wide spread of decisions. Sixteen founders received higher fixed remuneration in FY26, four received less and two remained unchanged. Ghazal Alagh’s fixed pay rose 60% to ₹2.4 Cr from ₹1.5 Cr, while Bhavish Aggarwal’s fell 34.8% to ₹4.5 Cr from ₹6.9 Cr.
The comparison becomes sharper at the top and bottom of the table. MobiKwik cofounders Bipin Preet Singh and Upasana Taku each received ₹6.3 Cr in fixed remuneration, while Falguni Nayar received ₹74 Lakh, down from ₹86 Lakh. Those figures show the size of the gap, not whether either arrangement was appropriate for the role, company or ownership structure.
For boards: Use the average as a reference point rather than a target. A change in fixed pay may reflect a different role scope or a deliberate movement towards variable compensation, but the remuneration figure alone cannot explain the decision.
For founders: Treat fixed pay as a recurring cash commitment. It may provide predictability for personal planning, while creating a less flexible cost line if company performance changes or the business is operating at a loss.
For employees: Do not infer total founder earnings from salary rankings. The published figures show that fixed remuneration can sit beside much larger bonus, incentive or equity amounts.
Startup founder salaries need two separate lenses
Fixed remuneration answers one narrow question: how much recurring pay was recorded for the role? It does not answer how much compensation depended on performance, nor does it capture share-based value. That distinction matters because a salary ranking can place two founders side by side while leaving out the mechanism that determines the rest of their package.
Lenskart provides a clear comparison. Peyush Bansal received ₹5.7 Cr in fixed remuneration and ₹12 Cr in bonuses and performance incentives. Neha Bansal received ₹2.7 Cr in fixed pay and ₹6 Cr in bonuses and performance incentives. The figures demonstrate the scale of variable compensation, but they do not establish whether the relevant targets were met or whether the arrangements were well designed.
Cost lens: Record fixed remuneration separately because it describes a recurring expense. Record bonuses and performance incentives as conditional cash, with the relevant measure and payment timing attached where those details are available.
Performance lens: Compare incentive amounts with the company’s reported operating results, while avoiding a claim that pay caused those results. Delhivery reported ₹10,486 Cr in operating revenue and ₹321 Cr in profit, while Meesho reported ₹12,626 Cr in operating revenue and a ₹1,357.7 Cr loss.
Communication lens: Explain whether a figure is fixed, conditional or equity-related. A larger bonus may create a different interpretation for employees and investors than the same amount added to fixed salary.
Equity requires a different accounting question
The largest figures in the tracker are not necessarily cash income for the reporting year. Sriharsha Majety’s ESOP gains were ₹549.3 Cr, while Kapil Bharati recorded ₹6.9 Cr in ESOP gains. FirstCry reported ₹31.7 Cr as the cost of stock options granted to Supam Maheshwari, alongside ₹1.4 Cr in fixed remuneration.
These entries describe different events. An ESOP gain is share-related value, while the cost of options granted describes the reported cost of an award. Neither should be combined with salary without explaining what the amount represents and whether it was received as cash during the year.
The effect chain is practical: compensation is split across fixed pay, conditional cash and equity; each component requires separate recording; review then moves from a single ranking to the terms and timing behind the number. That does not prove that one structure is better. It shows why a total without labels can create a misleading comparison.
Common mistake: Do not treat ₹12 Cr in bonuses and performance incentives as equivalent to ₹12 Cr in ESOP gains. The first is described as variable compensation, while the second depends on the share-based event reported for the founder.
Decision point: When reviewing an equity figure, ask whether it is an ESOP gain, an option-grant cost or another share-related entry. The tracker itself separates these components because they do not necessarily represent cash received during the year.
Company results add context, not causation
Founder pay becomes more informative when placed beside company performance, but the comparison needs discipline. Delhivery’s Sahil Barua received ₹3.4 Cr in fixed remuneration against reported operating revenue of ₹10,486 Cr and profit of ₹321 Cr. Ather’s Tarun Mehta received ₹2.1 Cr, while the company reported ₹3,671.8 Cr in operating revenue and a ₹517.2 Cr loss.
Those figures provide context for a governance discussion. They do not prove that a particular salary caused profit, loss, revenue growth or decline. They also do not capture ownership, board decisions, role scope or the conditions attached to variable pay.
Use the first comparison. Compare current fixed pay with the prior year. The overall 2.3% increase sits alongside Ghazal Alagh’s 60% rise and Bhavish Aggarwal’s 34.8% decline, showing why the aggregate figure cannot stand in for an individual decision.
Use the second comparison. Place fixed pay beside bonuses, performance incentives and equity entries. Peyush Bansal’s ₹12 Cr in bonuses and performance incentives changes the interpretation of his ₹5.7 Cr fixed pay, but it does not remove the need to inspect the terms.
Keep the boundary clear. Report operating revenue and profit or loss as company measures, not as proof of founder performance. This keeps the analysis grounded without claiming a relationship the figures do not establish.
What operators should change in compensation reviews
The useful response is a more precise compensation ledger, not a more dramatic salary leaderboard. The figures support four practical changes for founders, finance leaders, boards and investors reviewing pay, hiring cost or governance disclosures.
Build a fixed-pay baseline. Track current and prior fixed remuneration for each founder. Use the FY25-to-FY26 movement as the comparison, while keeping the aggregate figure separate from individual changes.
Map every incentive. Record bonuses and performance incentives in a separate field from salary. Add the stated measure and payment timing when available, because the amount alone does not show what condition triggered it.
Separate equity events. Label ESOP gains and the cost of stock options granted independently from cash compensation. Majety’s ₹549.3 Cr ESOP gains and Maheshwari’s ₹31.7 Cr option-grant cost illustrate why one equity column can blur materially different entries.
Pair pay with company context. Show operating revenue and profit or loss beside remuneration, while stating that the comparison is contextual rather than causal. For more practical analysis of technology and business decisions, explore the Yanisa Execution blog.
Startup founder salaries are a starting point for analysis, not a complete measure of founder pay. If your current reporting combines salary, incentives and equity, compare the separate fields with your finance or governance team before the next compensation review.
Frequently Asked Questions
How much fixed remuneration did the tracked founders receive in FY26?
Twenty-two founders across 15 new-age technology companies received a combined ₹66.87 Cr in fixed remuneration in FY26. Average fixed remuneration was ₹3.04 Cr per founder.
Which founders received the highest fixed pay?
MobiKwik cofounders Bipin Preet Singh and Upasana Taku each received ₹6.3 Cr in fixed remuneration. Lenskart cofounder Peyush Bansal followed with ₹5.7 Cr.
Why is fixed salary not enough to compare startup founder pay?
Fixed remuneration excludes bonuses, performance incentives and share-based compensation. These components can materially change the reported value, while differing in timing and conditions.
Do ESOP gains represent cash received by a founder?
Not necessarily. ESOP-related gains and the cost of stock options granted should be distinguished from fixed remuneration and cash incentives because they do not necessarily represent cash received during the year.
Who recorded the largest percentage increase in fixed remuneration?
Ghazal Alagh recorded the largest percentage increase among the tracked founders. Her fixed remuneration rose 60% to ₹2.4 Cr from ₹1.5 Cr.