Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
How does Walmart's average wage compare to competitors like Target and Amazon?
Executive Summary
Walmart’s reported average and starting wages have varied across sources and years, but the consistent pattern is that Walmart generally pays less at entry level than Amazon and sometimes less than Target, while its total compensation package (wages plus benefits and advancement pathways) narrows the gap. Recent companywide raises and role-specific boosts have lifted average hourly figures above earlier lows, yet third-party salary surveys still show Walmart trailing some rivals on median pay [1] [2] [3].
1. The headline numbers: different measures, different stories — why averages diverge
Analysts and reporters use different metrics when quoting Walmart’s pay, producing divergent headline figures. Some outlets report hourly averages for frontline workers—e.g., a $14.26 average for full‑time field associates with $19.31 in total compensation—while others cite companywide annual averages (roughly $31,618 per year) that conflate hourly associates, salaried managers, and corporate staff [1] [4]. Corporate announcements and media reporting of planned minimums or average hourly targets (Walmart aiming to push averages above $17.50 in 2023) add further variance because they reflect policy intent or phased rollouts rather than a single snapshot of realized pay on a given date [2] [3]. The bottom line is that comparisons hinge on whether you compare starting wages, frontline hourly averages, or companywide mean salaries, and each produces a different competitive ranking [1] [4].
2. Entry-level comparison: Walmart vs. Target vs. Amazon — a persistent gap
Across multiple analyses the consistent finding is that Walmart’s starting pay historically trailed Amazon and Target. Studies and news reports cite Walmart starting wages in the low‑to‑mid teens (e.g., $11 historically or $12–$19 depending on local markets), while Target set $15 minimums and Amazon publicly raised its entry floor above $15, later to figures above $18–$19 in many reports [1] [5] [3]. Third‑party labor research and employer comparisons highlight that in tight labor markets firms like Amazon and Costco moved earlier or more aggressively on minimum pay, forcing Walmart to respond with raises and bonuses. Thus, for prospective or current non‑managerial hourly hires, Walmart has typically offered lower starting cash wages than Amazon and sometimes lower than Target, even if benefits and development programs alter the total package [5] [6].
3. Mid‑career and management pay: Walmart’s heavier tail changes averages
Walmart’s compensation picture improves when including managerial and corporate pay. Reports note significant pay increases for market and store managers—figures such as six‑figure store manager averages and market manager packages pushed averages upward—which helps explain why companywide annual averages can appear competitive or even above some rivals’ means [7]. Walmart’s strategy of boosting manager pay and providing bonuses inflates mean salaries compared with median frontline wages, making headline “average pay” metrics potentially misleading for rank‑and‑file comparisons. This divergence explains why Zippia and similar aggregators list Walmart’s average annual pay lower than Target or Costco in some years, while company announcements highlight upward pressure on averages via managerial raises [4] [7].
4. Benefits, advancement, and “total compensation” — a critical contextual factor
Several sources emphasize Walmart’s non‑wage components—education benefits (e.g., $1‑a‑day college programs), training, promotional pipelines, and certain bonuses—that increase total compensation beyond cash hourly wages [1]. Analysts caution that when factoring benefits, employer‑sponsored education and internal mobility, Walmart’s overall offer can be more competitive than raw hourly comparisons suggest. This means workers weighing Walmart against Amazon or Target should consider not only base hourly pay but access to benefits, paid training, and promotion speed, because these elements materially affect lifetime earnings and cost‑of‑living tradeoffs [1] [8].
5. The trajectory and the takeaway: competition raised the floor, but gaps remain
Recent years of labor shortages and retailer competition pushed pay higher across the sector; Walmart announced minimum and average pay upgrades and targeted manager increases, while Amazon and Target also raised floors, keeping the marketplace dynamic [2] [3] [5]. Empirical labor studies and employer comparisons still show Walmart trailing some peers on median frontline pay, even as its total compensation and managerial pay lifts narrow the gap. For a precise, current comparison, the choice of metric—starting hourly wage, median frontline hourly pay, companywide mean salary, or total compensation including benefits—determines whether Walmart appears behind, comparable, or even ahead of competitors [6] [1].