With many recent events, such as the 2008 Financial Crisis, still under heavy scrutiny from the public, the payment received by executives at some of the major US banking institutions has been at the center of a major debate: are bank executives overpaid? While many people have attempted to answer this question, it is important to look at historical data and determine whether banks tie executive pay to the performance of the firm. The authors gathered historical 10-K data on firm performance at five major banks (Bank of America, Citigroup, JP Morgan, US Bancorp, and Wells Fargo), as well as Proxy Statement data on how top-5 executives were being paid at these banks. Correlations between how the firm performed during a given year and what the executive officers of the bank were paid were calculated, to see whether the two subjects correlated with one another. Results were mixed-certain banks drew large correlations between the pay of executives and firm performance, while other banks did not. Interpretation of such data leads to a belief that some banks rely on overall firm performance when setting pay packages for executives, while other banks do not, perhaps using internal measures of performance unknown to the public. Extensive further research could be conducted on this issue to determine what other measures might play a more prominent role when it comes to deciding pay for executives at big banks.