This article studies dynamic compensation and risk management under cash-flow volatility shocks. The optimal contract depends critically on firms’ ability to make good on promised future payments to managers. When volatility is low, firms with full commitment ability implement high pay–performance sensitivity to motivate effort from managers, and they impose large penalties on the arrival of volatility shocks to incentivize prudent risk management. In contrast, firms with limited commitment may allow excessive risk taking in exchange for low pay–performance sensitivity. When volatility becomes high, firms with full commitment defer compensation more, whereas firms with limited commitment must expedite payments.

We study a dynamic continuous-time principal-agent model with endogenous cash flow volatility. The principal supplies the agent with capital for investment, but the agent can misallocate capital for private benefit and has private control over both the volatility of the project and the size of the investment. The optimal incentive-compatible contract can yield either overly risky or overly prudent project selection; it can be implemented as a time-varying cost of capital in the form of a hurdle rate. Our model captures stylized facts about the use of hurdle rates in capital budgeting and helps to reconcile the mixed empirical evidence on the correlations among firm size, risk and managerial compensation.