Interesting article, but they don't link to the data, just suggest that you build the dataset yourself with Google. I'm also not seeing mention of cost of living.
> For ease of comparison we’ve converted all numbers to USD ($).
That seems a strange choice, given that this is Europe. The target market for this blog post must not be Europeans.
COL varies enormously in the US and yet even LCOL salaries are much higher than in the EU. I don't think COL is that useful when comparing salaries globally.
Also, my understanding is that in the US each person must dedicate an important amount of money to receive the health services that are provided in Europe by the administration in many countries.
not all and quality varies but generally in the tech sector I suppose they provide good quality as part of the compensation package, which also brings up the fact that generally when discussing compensation one should discuss the total package not just money (although money is generally most important)
While it does let you compare against US salaries, almost all EU countries use the Euro. Certainly all of the ones mentioned in this post do. If you're interested in just a raw number rather than a cost of living weighted number (which this post seems to ignore), converting any stragglers to Euro would have been simplest for European readers.
That said though, as I mentioned, I don't think Europeans are the target market for this.
Well, since this post includes the UK saying "all the countries in this post use Euros" is plain wrong.
I think COL in itself matters far less than people think. COL difference is certainly not proportional to salary difference.
I don't think this is specifically for EU readers either. I think it's aimed at a global audience since they use USD and mention US roles as well as their data on EU roles.
You realize that companies pay SV-like salaries outside of SV now, right? LCOL US salaries can easily be higher than HCOL EU salaries.
This is also exactly the same argument people in the US have tried to make about "SV" salaries vs "normal" salaries.
Ex: "making $100k in the Midwest is better than $300k in SV because COL"
It's plain wrong in almost all cases (Lower COL doesn't make up for lower salary) and SV vs elsewhere in the US is becoming less and less relevant with remote work.
Sometimes lower cost of living absolutely does make up for a lower salary. Ultimately it comes down to disposable income after your expenses are paid. If your cost of living is significantly lower despite your income decreasing, then your disposable income increases despite your salary decreasing.
It’s also why multinational services will often have regional pricing.
This phenomena might not be present in the US (I haven’t lived in enough American cities to make a generalisation here) but it’s absolutely true in Europe.
> SV vs elsewhere in the US is becoming less and less relevant with remote work.
Remote work will be what levels the playing field but we aren’t there yet. Most companies aren’t fully remote. Further more, as weird as it might sound to some on HN, some people do actually enjoy working with colleagues in an office.
So it’s very premature to handwave the cost of living with arguments like “because remote work”
I've seen this exact conversation happen on /r/cscareerquestions about US salaries an uncountable number of times. COL never makes up for the salary difference on the high end. Maybe for median and below salaries, but never for the top percentiles.
E: since you edited in stuff about remote work, I meant in the US. There are a lot of US companies that allow remote work within the US now. I was also talking about SV vs everywhere else in terms of salary difference, not COL. Even with a salary reduction, you're most likely making more than you 'should' in a LCOL area.
But this article IS an about median wages and not specifically about the top percentile!
> Lower COL does not make up for $139k USD
It can if property prices for those top percentiles are more than $139k cheaper.
My house is worth literally twice the price of my mother in laws house and she lives in a larger property. The only difference is she’s at the north end of England and I’m in the south.
In this data, which is focused on tech companies and the tech hubs in Europe (London, Berlin, Amsterdam, etc), the median salary for a senior developer is only $113k.
In other words, above average EU companies in HCOL cities still pay less than the average US developer (Any COL and experience!) earns.
E: editing in house prices is blatantly moving the goalposts.
Nobody is disputing the raw numbers. The point being made is those numbers are meaningless without taking more variables into account.
If you earn more but have less disposable income each month than someone doing the same job in London then who gives a shit if you have more zeros on your pay check?
That’s the crux of the matter here. Comparing salaries is meaningless if you don’t factor in who your disposable income is after expenses.
Or to put it another way, if you were a business then you cannot think of yourself as an angel invested unicorn start up. So you have to make a personal profit each month. If your outgoings are greater then you need to charge more. It’s simple mathematics.
> editing in house prices is blatantly moving the goalposts.
How is paying rent / mortgage not part of one’s cost of living?
This is the literal point everyone has been making to you from the start!
Edit: I’m going to throw in the towel now. Literally every European has explained why this article is worthless for any real comparison. But obviously you, as an American, know better than us, who work and live in Europe, about just how much money we take home each month from our jobs in Europe.
According to BLS and this data, the average US developer (Who has lower COL) makes about the same as a senior developer in London (120k vs 126k).
Therefore, even taking COL into account, an average US developer makes more than a above average, senior London developer (This dataset is skewed towards tech companies).
It's simple mathematics.
PS: house prices in most of the US are also highly likely to be lower than in London.
Numbers do not lie, but people’s interpretations of them can still be wrong.
I don’t dispute the numbers but I do dispute how they’re being used to represent some biases without any consideration for the accuracy of how they’re compared and collated.
Yeah London is expensive. No one would dispute that. But cost of living can vary significantly in the U.K. alone (let alone in the wider Europe). So treat London as a solitary data point (like you would with SV when looking at the cost of living in American).
> Therefore, even taking COL into account, an average US developer makes the same as above average, senior London developer (This dataset is skewed towards tech companies).
That’s a better analysis than your first attempts but it’s still flawed because London is one city and and America is an entire country. So you’ve got rural parts of America pushing down the cost of living and the top percentiles in SV pushing the salary averages up.
A better comparison would be comparing tech hubs individually.
Also please bear in mind that I wasn’t arguing that Europeans have more disposable income generally. Just that the cost of living does level out the playing field somewhat.
I honestly have no idea of Americans or Europeans are more well off. I just disagree that any analysis can be made with looking at averages salaries alone.
> house prices in most of the US are also highly likely to be lower than in London.
In most parts they absolutely will be. Just like in most places in the U.K. house prices will be cheaper (I already made that point earlier by the way).
But if you were to compare the largest tech hub in America to the largest tech hub in England, you might find London comes out cheaper.
> I'm not american, nor do I live in the US.
Sorry for making that assumption. Though I hope you can appreciate why I had when literally every datapoint you referenced was specifically about America in a conversation about European wages and cost of living. :)
My analysis has been exactly the same this whole time. I've just been trying to phrase it differently because you don't seem to understand what I'm getting at, which is that even when you take COL into account an average US developer comes out even or ahead of an above average EU developer financially.
It's denying reality to believe that EU devs are even with US devs financially. I have no horse in this race, I just care about the truth.
I use the US as an example of COL difference not being proportional to salary difference because it's the most egregious example.
If you had looked at the BLS data you would have seen that both the mean and median are $120k, so the argument of rural COL and SV salaries doesn't hold: https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes151252.htm.
If you want to compare tech hubs it's extremely simple: look at https://levels.fyi and compare locations.
> It's denying reality to believe that EU devs are even with US devs financially. I have no horse in this race, I just care about the truth.
I think you are missing the bigger picture here with purely financial comparisons. I earn much less in Europe than I would in the US, but at the same time, I don't have to worry about healthcare nor my kids being shot up in the school. As long as I breathe (and even when I stopped not too long time ago), ambulance service will give me a ride to the nearest hospital for free and the hospital will treat me the best way the can without paying any attention how much money I have in my pocket. (I still have trouble believing that emergency ambulance costs money in the US.) Local school system is among the best in the world and I pay nothing for it. To me, this is tremendous non-direct value I get from working in Europe instead of the US. And these benefits aren't just for me; they're for everyone and the society is more cohesive as a result, which leads to things like not having to worry about desperate outcasts taking guns to shoot up a school. Active shooter drills are unheard of, people watch documentaries on American schools with astonishment and disbelief.
Unless you account for non-direct quality of life factors like how much time you and everyone around you can spend with their children while they're growing up, I don't think these comparisons make much sense. It's like comparing how many megabytes of disk space operating systems occupy, without paying attention to what capabilities they offer and how well they suit specific use cases.
> My analysis has been exactly the same this whole time. I've just been trying to phrase it differently because you don't seem to understand what I'm getting at, which is that even when you take COL into account an average US developer comes out even or ahead of an above average EU developer financially.
That is an impossible statement to make because you’re making such a broad generalisation that it could be true or false depending on how you derive your averages. And this article certainly can’t be used as evidence for that conclusion.
I think the problem here is you’re arguing that Americans are better off. I couldn’t give a toss who is (it’s not a competition ffs). I’m just saying this article is worthless and people shouldn’t draw any conclusions from it.
I know, I live in one that doesn’t. However no European county uses USD. So we are much more familiar with seeing Euros as a European benchmark than USD.
Also worth noting, EU is a subset of Europe. London isn’t in the EU but is in Europe.
It is but that isn’t the point. You wouldn’t show the wages in any other unrelated currency, like Dogecoin, and say “but the exchange rate is basically equal”.
If you’re measuring European financial assets then they should be represented in a European currency (and if you want to show USD then have that as an additional field or afterwards in brackets).
Everyone in Europe but not the Eurozone knows the rough exchange rate between their local currency and the Euro. We see prices in Euros on many foreign trips, and for some online purchases.
I said it above and I’m going to repeat it here: what’s the point of adjustment? I might have completely different cost structure than you. The lifestyle was so different for people I worked with in Berlin.
Hmm I wonder how they did the TC though since the value of stock has absolutely plummeted now.
On salary I'm well below the median value here despite being a senior engineer at a large international company, in a department that pays slightly higher on average.
Salaries in Europe are pitiful nevertheless, and then you've gotta add the 40% income tax and 25% VAT too :(
Are they really that pitiful compared to the global average? I think that in the English-speaking tech sphere we are just too inclined to compare to the US. But compared to the rest of the world, and outside of a few small low-tax hubs (Singapore, UAE, etc), they're quite in line with the rest of the job market.
(I do think we're getting fleeced in absolute terms, but that's nothing specific to the tech industry)
Kinda, the benefit in the UAE is that the taxes are lower, but it's really company-dependent since you have fewer worker protections. I turned down a job offer there because it's so far away, so if you lost the job (see recent layoffs), it'd be a nightmare.
But Australia and Canada both have slightly better salaries too (just not US-level).
Hardly, there are huge issues with public healthcare access, public pensions (if they even exist when we retire - if we can ever retire), crime-ridden public transport, etc.
Our governments sold us out to become an open-air refugee centre and museum for the US. Crushing wages and trade unions with huge amounts of cheap labour, and abandoning the working class.
>We’ve used publicly available job boards and self reported data points on European data pay to collect data for 500 jobs across 260 companies.
Unfortunately this isn't a particularly useful methodology. Pay data isn't a legal requirement in job ads in Europe (yet) and most job ads opt not to include the data.
I should have read the article properly, thanks for highlighting that quote. Thought I was massively underpaid (not far removed from 50% for the median at the experience level I'll have in 7 months) but, of course, the job ads that mention any salary will be the ones that have a salary to brag about.
I've scarcely seen a job ad in my area that mentions a minimum salary, only in bigger cities (>1M people) some bigcorps that need to be your cup of tea in the first place. That this only includes job ads with salaries mentioned essentially makes this useless.
Plus, not all secondary benefits can be converted to money (how much is working from home worth, the same as a few hundred days' worth of bus tickets? What about the time saved?), which I should also keep in mind when looking at salary comparisons.
The median for EU vs US salaries seems likely to be around the same, but the high end in the EU is completely neutered compared to the US. Even in top companies like e.g. Meta, the pay in the US is significantly higher.
Because most of the companies are American and like to keep their best guarded talent close to home, I guess.
Also the corporate culture is entirely different. In a European IT company you won't get paid $600k for being an IC. You might get that level of pay, but as some kind of management. But as just one of the runts who does the IT? No way.
The post has no methods section. So we have no clue what their data was, how they gathered it, how representative it was... nothing. I didn't find this particularly useful. Surely there is a group out there who's done a high quality (and ongoing) survey with reliable data on this.
Articles like these are complete garbage for any practical extrapolation and thus only really written as ad pieces.
Why? Because:
- cost of living isn’t taken into account
- and even if it were, the cost of living varies wildly from one city to another. So you’d need less generalised results
- converting everything to USD makes no sense when the article is supposed to be about European countries. And since exchange rates can add their own slant on figures, this isn’t really intended to be an accurate representation
- it also doesn’t take into account variations in professions (IT is a broad industry)
- where has the data come from? I wouldn’t trust any report that basically scraped job listing boards. So many European job adverts don’t disclose salaries, some do but never get filled because they ask too little. So do get filled but at a rate that differs from the advertised range (it’s not uncommon for salary haggling to happen once an offer has been sent).
This article will surely generate conversation but please be aware that it’s far too unscientific to be worth drawing any conclusions from.
Cost of living doesn’t have to be taken into account in a salary analysis because everyone has a different cost of living. It’s not called a “quality of life” analysis.
Because everyone has a different cost of living is exactly why it needs to be taken into account when comparing salaries.
If it were just reporting regional salaries then that would be different. But when you then generalise salaries across lots of regions with wildly different cost of living, then you either need to adjust for regional variations or add massive disclaimers that these are superficial figures and cannot be used as a basis of comparison.
Does the analysis say anything about purchasing power? I mean, if someone is dumb enough to read just this one article and move to a different country because there was no disclaimer… I expect the target audience to have at least rudimentary critical thinking ability.
I wouldn’t suggest people are dumb enough to move, but people are certainly dumb enough to make widely inaccurate conclusions (as they have done here).
I was quite surprised that the 75 percentile salary is highest in Amsterdam.
Anecdotally it seems that the top end of salaries is much higher in London than in Amsterdam, but maybe that doesn't show until the 90-95th percentile.
Calling this Europe data when you're comparing data from 5 European cities is a bit exaggerated. We have 44 countries in Europe and even within a country there can be significant differences.
Those are the only relevant locations for somebody who is considering emigrating for career purposes. The other countries do not have job markets big enough and salaries high enough to merit the effort of moving there, considering we are talking about actual countries, with different languages and cultures.
So, converted in USD, and comparing gross salaries when there's massive variations in cost of living and taxes.
I worked in the UK and the EU, made significantly more in the UK, but didn't have a comparatively higher quality of life.
This could be useful for a multinational looking into allocating its workforce, but I'd advise candidates to do a little bit more reasearch before packing up and moving...
63 comments
[ 0.27 ms ] story [ 138 ms ] thread> For ease of comparison we’ve converted all numbers to USD ($).
That seems a strange choice, given that this is Europe. The target market for this blog post must not be Europeans.
But without factoring in cost of living that's surely rather meaningless too
That said though, as I mentioned, I don't think Europeans are the target market for this.
I think COL in itself matters far less than people think. COL difference is certainly not proportional to salary difference.
I don't think this is specifically for EU readers either. I think it's aimed at a global audience since they use USD and mention US roles as well as their data on EU roles.
No, sometimes the COL is much cheaper than the salary discrepancy. Sometimes it’s worse.
Which is precisely why COL is absolutely vital when making any comparisons.
Also there already is a standardised EU currency. It’s even named after the EU: “Euro”.
This is also exactly the same argument people in the US have tried to make about "SV" salaries vs "normal" salaries.
Ex: "making $100k in the Midwest is better than $300k in SV because COL"
It's plain wrong in almost all cases (Lower COL doesn't make up for lower salary) and SV vs elsewhere in the US is becoming less and less relevant with remote work.
Sometimes lower cost of living absolutely does make up for a lower salary. Ultimately it comes down to disposable income after your expenses are paid. If your cost of living is significantly lower despite your income decreasing, then your disposable income increases despite your salary decreasing.
It’s also why multinational services will often have regional pricing.
This phenomena might not be present in the US (I haven’t lived in enough American cities to make a generalisation here) but it’s absolutely true in Europe.
> SV vs elsewhere in the US is becoming less and less relevant with remote work.
Remote work will be what levels the playing field but we aren’t there yet. Most companies aren’t fully remote. Further more, as weird as it might sound to some on HN, some people do actually enjoy working with colleagues in an office.
So it’s very premature to handwave the cost of living with arguments like “because remote work”
US ($339k): https://www.levels.fyi/companies/facebook/salaries/software-...
UK ($200k): https://www.levels.fyi/companies/facebook/salaries/software-...
Lower COL does not make up for $139k USD.
I've seen this exact conversation happen on /r/cscareerquestions about US salaries an uncountable number of times. COL never makes up for the salary difference on the high end. Maybe for median and below salaries, but never for the top percentiles.
E: since you edited in stuff about remote work, I meant in the US. There are a lot of US companies that allow remote work within the US now. I was also talking about SV vs everywhere else in terms of salary difference, not COL. Even with a salary reduction, you're most likely making more than you 'should' in a LCOL area.
> Lower COL does not make up for $139k USD
It can if property prices for those top percentiles are more than $139k cheaper.
My house is worth literally twice the price of my mother in laws house and she lives in a larger property. The only difference is she’s at the north end of England and I’m in the south.
Cost of living can vary dramatically in Europe.
In this data, which is focused on tech companies and the tech hubs in Europe (London, Berlin, Amsterdam, etc), the median salary for a senior developer is only $113k.
In other words, above average EU companies in HCOL cities still pay less than the average US developer (Any COL and experience!) earns.
E: editing in house prices is blatantly moving the goalposts.
If you earn more but have less disposable income each month than someone doing the same job in London then who gives a shit if you have more zeros on your pay check?
That’s the crux of the matter here. Comparing salaries is meaningless if you don’t factor in who your disposable income is after expenses.
Or to put it another way, if you were a business then you cannot think of yourself as an angel invested unicorn start up. So you have to make a personal profit each month. If your outgoings are greater then you need to charge more. It’s simple mathematics.
> editing in house prices is blatantly moving the goalposts.
How is paying rent / mortgage not part of one’s cost of living?
This is the literal point everyone has been making to you from the start!
Edit: I’m going to throw in the towel now. Literally every European has explained why this article is worthless for any real comparison. But obviously you, as an American, know better than us, who work and live in Europe, about just how much money we take home each month from our jobs in Europe.
Most of the US has lower COL than London: https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/cost-of-living/united-states....
According to BLS and this data, the average US developer (Who has lower COL) makes about the same as a senior developer in London (120k vs 126k).
Therefore, even taking COL into account, an average US developer makes more than a above average, senior London developer (This dataset is skewed towards tech companies).
It's simple mathematics.
PS: house prices in most of the US are also highly likely to be lower than in London.
PPS: I'm not american, nor do I live in the US.
Numbers do not lie, but people’s interpretations of them can still be wrong.
I don’t dispute the numbers but I do dispute how they’re being used to represent some biases without any consideration for the accuracy of how they’re compared and collated.
> Most of the US has lower COL than London: https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/cost-of-living/united-states....
Yeah London is expensive. No one would dispute that. But cost of living can vary significantly in the U.K. alone (let alone in the wider Europe). So treat London as a solitary data point (like you would with SV when looking at the cost of living in American).
> Therefore, even taking COL into account, an average US developer makes the same as above average, senior London developer (This dataset is skewed towards tech companies).
That’s a better analysis than your first attempts but it’s still flawed because London is one city and and America is an entire country. So you’ve got rural parts of America pushing down the cost of living and the top percentiles in SV pushing the salary averages up.
A better comparison would be comparing tech hubs individually.
Also please bear in mind that I wasn’t arguing that Europeans have more disposable income generally. Just that the cost of living does level out the playing field somewhat.
I honestly have no idea of Americans or Europeans are more well off. I just disagree that any analysis can be made with looking at averages salaries alone.
> house prices in most of the US are also highly likely to be lower than in London.
In most parts they absolutely will be. Just like in most places in the U.K. house prices will be cheaper (I already made that point earlier by the way).
But if you were to compare the largest tech hub in America to the largest tech hub in England, you might find London comes out cheaper.
> I'm not american, nor do I live in the US.
Sorry for making that assumption. Though I hope you can appreciate why I had when literally every datapoint you referenced was specifically about America in a conversation about European wages and cost of living. :)
It's denying reality to believe that EU devs are even with US devs financially. I have no horse in this race, I just care about the truth.
I use the US as an example of COL difference not being proportional to salary difference because it's the most egregious example.
If you had looked at the BLS data you would have seen that both the mean and median are $120k, so the argument of rural COL and SV salaries doesn't hold: https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes151252.htm.
If you want to compare tech hubs it's extremely simple: look at https://levels.fyi and compare locations.
SF: https://www.levels.fyi/t/software-engineer/locations/san-fra...
NY: https://www.levels.fyi/t/software-engineer/locations/new-yor...
London: https://www.levels.fyi/t/software-engineer/locations/london-...
Berlin: https://www.levels.fyi/t/software-engineer/locations/berlin-...
> But if you were to compare the largest tech hub in America to the largest tech hub in England, you might find London comes out cheaper
Yes, but the salaries in tech hubs in US are nuts compared to London. Especially on the high end.
I think you are missing the bigger picture here with purely financial comparisons. I earn much less in Europe than I would in the US, but at the same time, I don't have to worry about healthcare nor my kids being shot up in the school. As long as I breathe (and even when I stopped not too long time ago), ambulance service will give me a ride to the nearest hospital for free and the hospital will treat me the best way the can without paying any attention how much money I have in my pocket. (I still have trouble believing that emergency ambulance costs money in the US.) Local school system is among the best in the world and I pay nothing for it. To me, this is tremendous non-direct value I get from working in Europe instead of the US. And these benefits aren't just for me; they're for everyone and the society is more cohesive as a result, which leads to things like not having to worry about desperate outcasts taking guns to shoot up a school. Active shooter drills are unheard of, people watch documentaries on American schools with astonishment and disbelief.
Unless you account for non-direct quality of life factors like how much time you and everyone around you can spend with their children while they're growing up, I don't think these comparisons make much sense. It's like comparing how many megabytes of disk space operating systems occupy, without paying attention to what capabilities they offer and how well they suit specific use cases.
I’ve made purely financial comparisons in this thread because that is what was being discussed.
That is an impossible statement to make because you’re making such a broad generalisation that it could be true or false depending on how you derive your averages. And this article certainly can’t be used as evidence for that conclusion.
I think the problem here is you’re arguing that Americans are better off. I couldn’t give a toss who is (it’s not a competition ffs). I’m just saying this article is worthless and people shouldn’t draw any conclusions from it.
Also worth noting, EU is a subset of Europe. London isn’t in the EU but is in Europe.
If you’re measuring European financial assets then they should be represented in a European currency (and if you want to show USD then have that as an additional field or afterwards in brackets).
On salary I'm well below the median value here despite being a senior engineer at a large international company, in a department that pays slightly higher on average.
Salaries in Europe are pitiful nevertheless, and then you've gotta add the 40% income tax and 25% VAT too :(
(I do think we're getting fleeced in absolute terms, but that's nothing specific to the tech industry)
But Australia and Canada both have slightly better salaries too (just not US-level).
Our governments sold us out to become an open-air refugee centre and museum for the US. Crushing wages and trade unions with huge amounts of cheap labour, and abandoning the working class.
Unfortunately this isn't a particularly useful methodology. Pay data isn't a legal requirement in job ads in Europe (yet) and most job ads opt not to include the data.
Publicly available salary is tricky but there's plenty of reliable, highly accurate pay-to-access sources like the Radford Aon Comp Survey: https://radford.aon.com/en-us/products/surveys/technology-co...
I've scarcely seen a job ad in my area that mentions a minimum salary, only in bigger cities (>1M people) some bigcorps that need to be your cup of tea in the first place. That this only includes job ads with salaries mentioned essentially makes this useless.
Plus, not all secondary benefits can be converted to money (how much is working from home worth, the same as a few hundred days' worth of bus tickets? What about the time saved?), which I should also keep in mind when looking at salary comparisons.
US ($339k): https://www.levels.fyi/companies/facebook/salaries/software-...
UK ($200k): https://www.levels.fyi/companies/facebook/salaries/software-...
Also the corporate culture is entirely different. In a European IT company you won't get paid $600k for being an IC. You might get that level of pay, but as some kind of management. But as just one of the runts who does the IT? No way.
- DE: https://germantechjobs.de/en/salaries
- CH: https://swissdevjobs.ch/salaries
- RO: https://devjob.ro/en/salaries
- UK: https://devitjobs.uk/salaries
Why? Because:
- cost of living isn’t taken into account
- and even if it were, the cost of living varies wildly from one city to another. So you’d need less generalised results
- converting everything to USD makes no sense when the article is supposed to be about European countries. And since exchange rates can add their own slant on figures, this isn’t really intended to be an accurate representation
- it also doesn’t take into account variations in professions (IT is a broad industry)
- where has the data come from? I wouldn’t trust any report that basically scraped job listing boards. So many European job adverts don’t disclose salaries, some do but never get filled because they ask too little. So do get filled but at a rate that differs from the advertised range (it’s not uncommon for salary haggling to happen once an offer has been sent).
This article will surely generate conversation but please be aware that it’s far too unscientific to be worth drawing any conclusions from.
If it were just reporting regional salaries then that would be different. But when you then generalise salaries across lots of regions with wildly different cost of living, then you either need to adjust for regional variations or add massive disclaimers that these are superficial figures and cannot be used as a basis of comparison.
Anecdotally it seems that the top end of salaries is much higher in London than in Amsterdam, but maybe that doesn't show until the 90-95th percentile.
"[Some] Europe[an] [City] [Large Tech] data salary benchmark 2023"
The _majority_ of people will not see anything even remotely like this pay on average.