Guide
Top H-1B Sponsors by Salary
Which companies pay H-1B workers the most based on DOL LCA data: quant firms, large tech, and how to research employer wages.
Which companies pay H-1B workers the most, based on DOL LCA offered-wage data from 1.88 million petitions.
Key Takeaway
Median H-1B offered wages vary dramatically by employer. Finance and specialized tech companies (quantitative trading, AI research labs) pay $200,000-$400,000+ median wages. Large tech companies (Google, Meta, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft) range from $150,000-$200,000. Consulting and IT staffing firms that volume-sponsor at lower wage levels post much lower medians despite their petition scale. All wage data comes from DOL LCA public disclosure filings.
Highest-Paying H-1B Sponsors: Finance & Quant Trading
Quantitative finance and hedge fund firms consistently top H-1B wage rankings. These employers sponsor a relatively small number of workers annually but at dramatically higher wages than the broader H-1B market. Their LCAs reveal the top end of what the US labor market pays sponsored workers.
| Employer | Sector | Median Offered Wage | Dominant Level |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jane Street Capital | Quant Trading | $400,000+ | Level IV |
| Two Sigma Investments | Quant / AI | $300,000–$400,000 | Level IV |
| Citadel / Citadel Securities | Hedge Fund / Market Making | $300,000–$400,000 | Level III-IV |
| DE Shaw & Co. | Quant / Hedge Fund | $250,000–$350,000 | Level III-IV |
| OpenAI | AI Research | $250,000–$350,000 | Level III-IV |
| Stripe | Fintech | $200,000–$280,000 | Level III-IV |
Wage ranges are illustrative based on LCA public data patterns. Actual offers include equity compensation not reflected in LCA wages. Search specific employers on PlainVisa employer pages for exact LCA-disclosed wages.
Large Tech Companies: Volume + Competitive Wages
The large technology companies sponsor orders of magnitude more H-1B workers than quant firms, and they pay competitive wages at scale. These employers combine high volumes (thousands of LCAs per year) with wages well above national medians, making them the most reliable H-1B pathways for tech professionals.
| Employer | Annual LCA Volume | Median Offered Wage | Dominant Wage Level |
|---|---|---|---|
| Google / Alphabet | 8,000–10,000/yr | ~$180,000 | Level III |
| Meta Platforms | 4,000–6,000/yr | ~$175,000 | Level III |
| Apple | 3,000–5,000/yr | ~$165,000 | Level II-III |
| Microsoft | 8,000–12,000/yr | ~$158,000 | Level II-III |
| Amazon | 15,000–20,000/yr | ~$145,000 | Level II |
| Salesforce | 2,000–3,000/yr | ~$155,000 | Level II-III |
LCA wages are the minimum the employer attested to pay. Total compensation including stock and bonuses is typically significantly higher. Browse each employer's full profile on PlainVisa.
Why Volume Leaders Don't Top Salary Rankings
The employers that file the most H-1B petitions, primarily Indian IT services firms including Infosys, Tata Consultancy Services, Wipro, Cognizant, and HCL Technologies, account for a disproportionate share of all LCA filings but post much lower median wages. This is not a coincidence.
IT staffing and consulting companies operate a fundamentally different model: they place workers at client sites (banks, insurance companies, retailers) for project-based work. These placements span a wide range of roles at different compensation levels. The volume of filings (often 10,000-30,000+ per year per firm) creates a statistical distribution that pulls the median toward entry-level wages, even if individual workers are paid competitively.
For workers seeking sponsorship, this distinction matters: a Level II filing from an IT staffing firm may mean a comparable role to a Level III filing at a product company, but at lower guaranteed wages. Always look at the offered wage field, not just the wage level, when evaluating potential sponsors. Search any employer on PlainVisa to see their wage distributions.
High-Paying Sectors Beyond Tech
While technology dominates H-1B sponsorship by volume, several other sectors offer competitive wages for sponsored workers:
- Pharmaceuticals and biotech: Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Genentech, and other pharma companies sponsor researchers and scientists at Levels III-IV. Median wages for sponsored scientists and engineers run $120,000-$160,000.
- Investment banking: Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, Morgan Stanley, and other banks sponsor significant numbers of quantitative analysts and financial engineers at competitive wages, often $150,000-$250,000.
- Management consulting: McKinsey, BCG, Bain, and Deloitte sponsor at Level II-III for analysts and consultants, with wages typically $100,000-$150,000.
- Healthcare: Physician roles sponsored through J-1 waiver programs and some H-1B tracks can reach $200,000+ for specialists, though the process differs significantly from tech sponsorship.
Browse by occupation on PlainVisa to see which sectors dominate sponsorship in your field, and by metro to find the highest-wage markets for your location preferences.
How to Research Employers Before Applying
LCA data provides a powerful pre-application research tool for any job seeker who needs sponsorship. Before targeting an employer:
- Check sponsorship history: Look at their annual LCA volume on PlainVisa. Employers who have sponsored consistently for multiple years are more likely to continue sponsoring.
- Look at certification rates: Most LCAs are certified. An employer with unusually low certification rates (below 90%) may have compliance issues.
- Compare wage levels: If the employer consistently files at Level I for roles you'd consider senior, they may be underpaying H-1B workers. Cross-reference with job postings to see if advertised salaries match LCA wages.
- Check the job title mix: Does the employer sponsor for the role type you're targeting? Some companies heavily sponsor engineers but rarely sponsor product managers or designers.
- Look at geographic distribution: Does the employer sponsor at your preferred location? Some companies only sponsor for specific offices.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which companies pay H-1B workers the most?
Based on DOL LCA data, technology companies consistently offer the highest median H-1B wages. Hedge funds, quantitative finance firms, and specialized tech companies (OpenAI, Jane Street, Two Sigma, Citadel) regularly offer median wages of $200,000-$400,000+. Large tech companies (Google, Meta, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon) offer median H-1B wages of $150,000-$200,000. Consulting and IT staffing firms that volume-sponsor at lower wage levels pull down industry medians.
How is median salary calculated from LCA data?
PlainVisa calculates median offered wage from the wage field in certified LCA filings. This is the wage the employer attested to pay, what they actually pay may be higher. LCA wages represent a floor, not a ceiling. Median is used rather than mean to reduce distortion from outliers. Employers with fewer than 10 filings are excluded from ranking tables to ensure statistical reliability.
Does a higher LCA wage mean the company is a better sponsor?
Not necessarily. Wage level is one factor among several. Also important: certification rate (percentage of LCAs that were certified vs. withdrawn/denied), petition volume (companies that sponsor many workers have established processes), and sponsorship history (consistent filers are more likely to continue). Check individual employer pages on PlainVisa for the full picture.
Why do consulting/staffing companies show lower median wages?
IT staffing and consulting companies (Infosys, Wipro, Tata Consultancy, Cognizant) file enormous volumes of H-1B petitions, often 10,000-30,000+ per year, predominantly at Wage Levels I and II, which correspond to entry and qualified experience levels. These placements are at client sites and reflect a variety of roles at different pay scales. Their volume dominance means they appear prominently in petition counts but lower in salary rankings.
Are H-1B salaries publicly available?
Yes. The DOL publishes all certified LCA data as public disclosure files. This includes the offered wage range, wage level, employer name, job title, and worksite location for every petition. PlainVisa processes and aggregates this data to enable employer-level wage analysis. Individual LCA filings are public record.
What is the difference between wage level I, II, III, and IV?
The DOL sets prevailing wages at four levels based on experience and skill for each occupation and geographic area. Level I = entry-level (17th percentile of wages). Level II = qualified (34th percentile). Level III = experienced (50th percentile, the true median). Level IV = fully competent senior/expert (67th percentile). Filing at Level I signals an employer seeking entry-level workers; Level IV signals senior or specialized expertise. See our LCA Wage Levels guide for full details.
Sources
- U.S. Department of Labor, LCA Disclosure Data, FY2023-FY2026
- DOL FLAG System, Prevailing Wage Data by SOC Code and Geography
- USCIS, H-1B Program Annual Reports
This content is for informational purposes only. Wage figures are derived from DOL LCA public disclosure data and represent offered wages, not total compensation. Actual compensation packages vary. This is not legal or financial advice.
Understanding the Data
The information presented throughout this guide is informed by publicly available public records published by federal and state government agencies. Our database aggregates and standardizes these records to make them more accessible and easier to interpret for general audiences. When we reference specific statistics or trends, they are drawn directly from these authoritative sources unless explicitly noted otherwise.
It is important to understand the limitations of any large-scale data dataset. Records may contain errors from the original data collection process, some fields may be incomplete for older entries, and classification systems may have changed over time. Our analysis accounts for these factors by clearly labeling data vintage, flagging records with missing critical fields, and noting when temporal comparisons span methodology changes in the source data.
For readers who want to conduct their own research, we recommend going directly to the source whenever possible. federal and state government agencies provides detailed documentation on collection methodology, sampling frames, and known data quality issues. Our goal is not to replace primary sources but to make them more approachable and to highlight patterns that may not be immediately obvious when browsing raw records.
How We Analyze Data Records
Our analytical approach involves several steps designed to surface meaningful insights from large datasets. First, we clean and standardize the raw data, handling variations in naming conventions, date formats, and categorical labels. Then we compute summary statistics, distributions, and comparative benchmarks across relevant dimensions such as geography, time period, and category type.
Key metrics we examine include statistical records, geographic distributions, temporal trends. These indicators provide a multi-dimensional view of each entity in our database, allowing users to understand not just individual records but how they compare to peers, regional averages, and national benchmarks. We believe this contextual approach is far more valuable than presenting raw numbers in isolation.
