Contents
If you're budgeting payroll for the next cycle, start with the numbers that shape every offer: the 2025 U.S. median base salary for licensed architects sits at $97,000-$97,470, while architectural engineers earn between $91,000 and $105,000 depending on specialty and region. That's a modest 0.31-1% bump from 2024, barely keeping pace with inflation and well below the jumps we're seeing in tech roles.
Yet hiring pressure isn't letting up. The profession still adds approximately 2,000 to 4,200 positions annually, with 4% projected growth through 2034, driven by demand for sustainable design and resilient infrastructure. In this climate, guessing at compensation burns through talent or blows up fee proposals.
Monograph's benchmarking approach gives you real-time salary data from peer A&E firms so you can set compensation and project fees with actual market intelligence instead of hope.
Fast Salary Snapshot 2025
If you just need the numbers before diving deeper, here they are. In 2025, a licensed architect can expect a national median base salary above $100,000 based on recent industry sources: significantly higher than previous years and reflecting adjustments above recent inflation rates. Architectural engineers have a slightly broader range, with recent surveys showing the 2025 median between $75,000 and $85,000. The architect-to-engineer gap holds steady at roughly 6–8%, same as last year.
At the top end, pay jumps dramatically. The 90th percentile for architects is typically between $111,000 and $146,000, substantially above the national median. Architectural engineers in the 90th percentile reach about $133,000, with structural and MEP specialists often commanding the premium.
Titles make a considerable difference too:
- Senior architects earning $120,000+
- Firm principals clearing $125,000 before bonuses or profit-sharing
These modest year-over-year gains show a market that's steady rather than booming, but they confirm why precise benchmarking matters when you're setting 2025 compensation plans. Remember these are base salaries; bonuses, profit sharing, and benefits can push total compensation significantly higher.
Why These Numbers Matter for 2025 Compensation Planning
If you run a small-to-mid A&E practice, the difference between a good year and a stressful one often comes down to how precisely you match pay to the market. This year's median figures ($97,000–$97,470 for architects and $91,000–$105,000 for architectural engineers) aren't just trivia. They shape every decision you make about hiring, pricing, and profitability. With roughly 3,600 new architect roles opening each year, talent can leave the moment they sense you're lagging behind neighboring firms.
Transparent benchmarking cuts through the guesswork. Instead of relying on dated surveys or coffee shop rumors, you can line up your pay bands against real-time data and see instantly whether your project architect in Austin sits at the 50th or the 75th percentile. This clarity helps you keep high performers, but it also sharpens your bid strategy. When labor is your biggest cost line, underestimating salaries means underpricing fees and watching margins disappear.
Accurate compensation planning also cushions you against the stop-and-start nature of project pipelines. At any moment, 25-30% of work may be paused, forcing you to juggle overhead without predictable revenue. Firms operating at healthy 81% utilization and 95% realization still wait an average of 34 days to get paid. In that gap, knowing your true cost per employee ($137,000) versus revenue per employee ($171,163) keeps payroll decisions grounded in reality.
Salary data isn't just a headline: it's the structural grid that supports retention, pricing, and profit in 2025.
National 2025 Averages: Side-by-Side Table
When you sit down to revise pay bands, you need numbers you can trust, not vague "industry averages." The table below gives you the most reliable 2025 data in a single snapshot you can share with partners before the next staffing conversation.
*Early-career architect figures come from experience-band data and are directionally useful when you're budgeting for interns or AXP candidates, but they're not always broken out in percentile-based surveys.
The average architect salary now sits at about $128,000, above the roughly $110,000-$120,000 median, because top-decile earners pull the average upward. That spread matters when you're deciding how aggressively to reward rising stars. Architectural engineers cluster more tightly; their median band tops out around $105k, and verified 90th-percentile data is still scarce. Their ceiling is lower, but their floor is slightly higher than unlicensed architects.
Compared with 2024, the architect-to-engineer pay gap has narrowed by a few hundred dollars. Architects gained roughly $300-$780 year-over-year, while the engineer median barely moved. The broad architect range of $66,649-$173,277 shows how volatile compensation can be once you factor in licensure, region, and firm ownership stakes. If your firm's numbers fall outside that band, it's worth investigating.
Use this table as the baseline before you layer on locality adjustments or bonus structures. It will keep conversations grounded in data, not intuition.
Regional & Market-Size Variations
If you've ever tried to staff a project in San Francisco and a project in rural Iowa at the same time, you know that "national average salary" is meaningless. Pay follows cost of living and local demand, and 2025 numbers make that reality crystal clear.
In high-cost regions (California's coastal metros) licensed architects earn between $97,000 and well over $120,000, with the upper quartile pushing past $150,000 in Los Angeles and San Francisco. New York and the booming Texas triangle track similar numbers, floating in the $90,000–$115,000 band. Add profit-sharing or principal titles, and those figures climb even higher.
Mid-tier markets like Austin, Seattle, and Denver tighten the range. You're looking at $82,000–$90,000 for solid mid-career talent: a sweet spot many firms use to balance labor cost against national-level project fees. These cities still carry big-city ambition, but rent and taxes haven't caught up yet.
Rural or low-cost regions sit a full tier lower:
- Mid-career architects typically earn $70,000-$85,000
- Entry-level roles dipping to the low sixties
- Margin protection beats headline salary every time
For firms in these areas, the math still works: revenue per employee averages $171,163 while cost per employee, including overhead, hovers around $137,000.
Architectural engineers follow a similar curve but start slightly higher in technical hotspots. Senior engineers focused on structural or MEP systems regularly break $105,000 in California, New York, and Texas, reflecting demand for deep building-systems expertise inside ever-complex codes.
These bands aren't static. Chicago, New York, and L.A. still set the ceiling; top-quartile architects in those cities routinely earn $120,000-$150,000 before bonuses. Meanwhile, firms in Boise or Des Moines leverage lower salaries to win national work, creating room to out-invest coastal competitors in technology and staff development.
Remote & Hybrid Impact
Then 2020 happened, and location lost its monopoly on salary negotiations. By 2025, A&E firms use a variety of compensation strategies, including fully remote compensation based on home cost-of-living, regional pay bands, and geographically neutral pay; these reflect emerging trends rather than universal practices.
Data-driven compensation tools let you benchmark a Denver hire against New York rates in seconds, so salary gaps are shrinking. Firms rooted in low-cost states now fish in a national talent pool, and that raises local offers, especially for BIM specialists or sustainability engineers who can work from anywhere.
Geography hasn't disappeared; it's just negotiable. Seasoned architects with a portfolio of net-zero buildings, or engineers holding a PE in multiple states, routinely argue for location-agnostic pay and often win. For everyone else, expect a softer gradient rather than a flat plain: enough variance to reward big-city living, but not enough to keep you from hiring the right person wherever they plug in their laptop.
Key Pay Drivers: Architects vs. Architectural Engineers
You already know a paycheck isn't just a reflection of talent; it's a product of how long it takes to become competent, how rare your skill set is, and how much value the market places on your experience. Three factors (education & licensure, specialization, and experience) explain nearly every dollar of the pay gap between architects and architectural engineers.
The path to a license creates the first fork in earnings. To stamp drawings you'll complete a five-year Bachelor of Architecture (often followed by a Master's), log 3,740 AXP hours, and pass the six-part ARE. That time investment postpones serious earning power, but once the license lands, wages jump into the mid-$80Ks almost overnight. Architectural engineers take a different route: a traditional four-year engineering degree, the FE exam, and supervised practice before the PE. Because FE status is attainable right after graduation and PE requirements vary by state and specialty, engineers reach licensed status sooner, but the credential doesn't carry the same universal premium.
That difference shows up in the numbers:
- U.S. architects average $107,000-$157,000 or more
- Architectural engineers typically earn around $68,000-$82,000, depending on region and role
The architect's longer, more standardized licensure track ultimately delivers higher market value, and higher pay, once complete.
Specialization is the second driver, and it's where the tables can turn. An architect versed in passive-house detailing, advanced BIM, or high-end commercial interiors can push compensation well into six figures in coastal cities, sometimes topping the $120K mark for senior roles. Engineers see an even steeper premium when they own a niche nobody else touches: façade thermal analysis, mass-timber seismic design, or hospital-grade HVAC commissioning. In New York or Los Angeles, that technical edge can add $15K-$25K to the usual engineer median, putting them neck-and-neck with design architects. The market is clear: rarity pays regardless of which side of the architect–engineer line you stand on.
Experience follows a straightforward progression. Fresh graduates in both professions start around $50,000, but the slope rises quickly. Early career (1-4 years) architects earn roughly $60,000; by mid-career (5–9 years) they're at $75,000; experienced pros (10-19 years) break $90,000; and veteran practitioners with two decades behind them top $100,000. Engineers follow a comparable curve (from EIT to PE to project manager) yet typically remain a few percentage points below their architect peers until specialization or management closes the gap. Senior designers, project architects, and engineering managers in major metros routinely clear $120,000, while principals or partners exceed $125,000 plus profit-sharing.
When you're setting compensation or negotiating your own, start with these three factors. Map the education hurdle, quantify the scarcity of your skill set, and benchmark where you sit on the experience ladder. Do that, and the salary conversation shifts from guesswork to grounded decisions.
Total Compensation Beyond Base Pay
Base salary only tells part of the story. When you sit down with a candidate or renegotiate your own package, you need the full cost of keeping talent in the seat, not just the number on the offer letter.
Bonuses come first because they're immediate and tangible. Only about 7% of architects report getting an annual bonus, yet the ones who do add an average of $1,389 (roughly 1.08% of salary) to their paychecks each year. That may feel modest, but it covers one professional conference or a licensure renewal, easing pressure on operating budgets.
Profit-sharing is the bigger lever. Recent benchmarking data shows that profit distributions, especially at the senior architect or principal level, drive lifetime earnings in A&E firms. When a firm pushes utilization to 81% and keeps realization near 95%, those extra percentage points flow straight into the profit pool. If you're not offering a slice of that pool, your best people will find a firm that does.
Equity and stock options used to live exclusively in Silicon Valley, but they're appearing in A&E firms, particularly those with tech-forward practices or corporate clients. Even a small equity stake can dwarf a flat bonus once a firm hits growth momentum.
The benefits stack represents the silent 20-30% of compensation most candidates overlook until they need it:
- Standard packages anchor on healthcare and 401(k) matching, usually 4–6% of salary
- The differentiators in 2025 are paid licensure hours, software stipends for BIM or energy modeling tools, and generous PTO banks that acknowledge unavoidable crunch periods
- Add professional development credits and you create a loop: the firm invests in skills that unlock higher fee potential, which funds richer profit-sharing
The top performers in your studio easily clear six figures beyond their base salary when you add it all together. Ignore these levers and you'll keep losing people to firms that treat total compensation as a design problem worth solving.
Trendlines & 2026-2028 Outlook
Since 2019, both architect and architectural engineer pay has generally increased by 0.5-1% annually, which is significantly below the average inflation rate of nearly 4% per year during the same period. The Bureau of Labor Statistics shows 2024 median architect salary at $96,690, and recent 2025 benchmarks confirm this trajectory at $97,000-$97,470, essentially a 0.31-1% bump that barely keeps pace with cost of living.
Architectural engineers typically earn between $45,000 and $112,000, with an average salary around $83,000. The pay gap between architects and engineers is generally narrow, but specific trends over time are not well-documented.
For 2026-2028, expect the same modest 0.5–1% annual increases unless demand shifts significantly. Three factors could change this:
- Infrastructure spending driven by federal incentives
- Client demand for net-zero buildings
- Cities pushing high-performance construction standards
Firms with proven sustainable design capabilities will have more room to negotiate higher rates and pass those gains to staff with specialized green credentials.
The real story is profit margins. Current benchmarks show revenue per employee at $171,163 against average employee costs of $137,000. Firms maintaining 81% utilization and 95% realization see this gap widen faster than annual salary increases. Smart firm owners reinvest these gains through profit-sharing or targeted bonuses rather than trying to compete on base salary alone: it's more effective for retention and doesn't inflate your overhead permanently.
Using Data to Drive Better Compensation Decisions
If you've ever priced a project and wondered later whether you paid your team too much or too little, you already know why accurate business data matters. The challenge isn't just knowing market salaries; it's understanding how compensation connects to your firm's actual financial performance.
Here's how successful A&E firms approach compensation planning:
Start by understanding your true cost per employee versus revenue per employee. Current industry benchmarks show revenue per employee averaging $180,000 while total employee costs hover around $137,000. Next, analyze your utilization rates and realization rates to see if salary increases will actually improve or hurt profitability. Finally, connect compensation decisions to project performance data so you can spot patterns between team costs and project success.
What makes this approach powerful is the connection between salary data and operational metrics. Instead of relying solely on generic salary surveys, you can see how compensation affects your specific business outcomes: project profitability, utilization rates, and cash flow timing. When you track these metrics consistently, you'll spot the relationships between pay decisions and business performance.
Firms using integrated project management platforms like Monograph report better visibility into these connections. Monograph's business intelligence provides real-time data on utilization, realization, and project profitability, helping you see whether salary investments translate to better business outcomes.
Compensation planning isn't a one-time exercise; it's an ongoing process. Once you connect pay decisions to business metrics, every hiring choice becomes more strategic and data-driven.
Stop Flying Blind on Compensation Decisions
You can't run a profitable A&E practice when critical salary data lives in scattered spreadsheets and outdated surveys. Every day you spend guessing at market rates is another day your competitors gain ground with better talent retention and more accurate project pricing.
Invest in benchmarking tools that understand A&E workflows. Move from reactive compensation planning to proactive decision-making. The right platform transforms scattered data into actionable insights, showing you which roles are underpaid, which markets command premiums, and when to adjust your fee structure.
Pick a platform built for architects and engineers. Pick Monograph.
Frequently Asked Questions
What are the most important salary benchmarks for architecture and engineering firms to track?
The essential salary benchmarks for A&E firms fall into three categories: position-based comparisons (licensed vs. unlicensed architects, PE vs. EIT engineers, principals vs. associates), regional adjustments (coastal metros vs. mid-tier cities vs. rural markets), and experience bands (0-3 years, 4-8 years, 9+ years experience).
Start with median salaries by role and region; these two factors alone will explain 80% of compensation variations in your market.
How often should architecture and engineering firms update their salary bands?
Salary bands should be reviewed quarterly and updated annually at minimum. A&E markets move slowly compared to tech, but ignoring shifts for 18+ months puts you at risk of losing talent to firms with more current compensation data.
Purpose-built benchmarking platforms like Monograph provide real-time data, so you can spot market movements before they affect retention.
Should remote and hybrid employees be paid differently than in-office staff?
Remote pay policies vary significantly across A&E firms. Some use location-based pay scales, others maintain geographic neutrality, and many fall somewhere between. The key is consistency: whatever policy you choose, apply it uniformly and communicate it clearly during the hiring process.
Consider that top talent increasingly expects location flexibility, so overly restrictive geographic pay policies may limit your candidate pool.
