Financial managers job market in Michigan

Industry trends, wages and hiring signals.

Data availability

Published industry context is limited

The report below shows the available evidence. Missing figures are not estimated.

Limited published dataCitation

Occupation pay

What Financial managers earn in Michigan

BLS OEWS occupation-level pay estimates for this role — separate from the industry wage trends used elsewhere in this report.

BLS OEWS source

Median annual wage

$139,370Michigan
Middle 50% of published wages
$105,490 – $182,120
U.S. median annual wage
$166,570
Reference period
May 2025

The middle 50% is the 25th-to-75th percentile wage range, not an experience-level band. Suppressed or unavailable BLS values remain unpublished rather than being estimated.

Pay around Michigan

How median pay varies by metro area

Published BLS OEWS metro estimates for Financial managers, compared with the Michigan median of $139,370.

Michigan median$139,370
Midland, MI$173,080+24.2% vs. state
Middle 50%$135,610 – $221,940Published employment310
Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI$160,240+15.0% vs. state
Middle 50%$117,480 – $206,780Published employment11,670
Jackson, MI$149,930+7.6% vs. state
Middle 50%$106,660 – $193,760Published employment310
Monroe, MI$140,110+0.5% vs. state
Middle 50%$104,520 – $175,880Published employment150
Ann Arbor, MI$139,500+0.1% vs. state
Middle 50%$113,060 – $181,710Published employment820
Grand Rapids-Wyoming-Kentwood, MI$133,380−4.3% vs. state
Middle 50%$102,020 – $170,510Published employment2,820
View 10 more published metro areas
Lansing-East Lansing, MI$132,590−4.9% vs. state
Middle 50%$106,250 – $166,020Published employment1,190
Kalamazoo-Portage, MI$130,760−6.2% vs. state
Middle 50%$104,500 – $172,670Published employment560
Saginaw, MI$129,020−7.4% vs. state
Middle 50%$102,590 – $167,070Published employment410
Flint, MI$128,950−7.5% vs. state
Middle 50%$98,560 – $172,210Published employment500
South Bend-Mishawaka, IN-MI$128,370−7.9% vs. state
Middle 50%$94,740 – $176,010Published employment580
Niles, MI$127,650−8.4% vs. state
Middle 50%$97,440 – $169,300Published employment260
Battle Creek, MI$127,370−8.6% vs. state
Middle 50%$89,760 – $164,000Published employment180
Bay City, MI$124,130−10.9% vs. state
Middle 50%$85,770 – $167,100Published employment120
Muskegon-Norton Shores, MI$120,070−13.8% vs. state
Middle 50%$85,770 – $150,520Published employment180
Traverse City, MI$119,810−14.0% vs. state
Middle 50%$91,830 – $169,580Published employment310

Areas are ordered by published median wage for readability, not as an overall job-market ranking. The vertical marker is the Michigan median. Some BLS metropolitan areas cross state lines, so a metro estimate can cover workers in more than one state.

Local research

What the data shows for financial managers in Michigan

Findings describe the published observation periods shown below. Research published Oct 11, 2026.

The highest-paying metro has a smaller employment market

Among 15 comparable metro estimates associated with Michigan in OEWS May 2025, the pay leader and employment-size leader differ. Midland, MI has the highest median annual pay at $173,080, with estimated employment of 310. Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI has the largest employment estimate at 11,670, with median pay of $160,240. The pay leader's median is 8.0% higher; estimated employment describes existing jobs, not available vacancies.

OEWS May 2025 · BLS OEWS

Some metro estimates cross state lines. Higher nominal pay does not establish better living standards or better chances of finding a job.

Published median pay is below the U.S. median

Michigan's published median annual wage for financial managers is 16.3% below the national median in OEWS May 2025. The state estimate is $139,370, compared with $166,570 across the U.S. These medians are not adjusted for living costs and do not describe every worker.

OEWS May 2025 · BLS OEWS

Findings describe published data and do not establish causes. Methodology

Indeed job postings · Michigan

Recent hiring-demand context · separate from the health score

102.8Postings index · February 1, 2020 = 100Observation: Oct 23, 2026
+2.8%Versus the February 2020 baseline
+1.1%Change over about four weeksSep 25, 2026 to Oct 23, 2026

This is statewide demand across all occupations, not demand for this specific job. Postings are not a count of vacancies or hires, and Indeed does not cover the entire labor market.

Source: Indeed Hiring Lab · CC BY 4.0. Seven-day average, seasonally adjusted; publisher refreshes weekly and may revise history. Retrieved Oct 30, 2026 · saved source copy. JobMarketHealth calculates the displayed changes and samples weekly observations for the chart.

Explore states and career fields · Methodology and limits

+0.5%Industry employmentU.S. 0.0%State data coverage: 91.07%
+0.9%EstablishmentsU.S. +2.4%State data coverage: 91.07%
+6.8%Avg. weekly industry wageU.S. +5.3%State data coverage: 91.07%
187,782Represented establishmentsEstablishments in the industries that employ this occupation, not employers hiring itIndustry mix share 85.6%, separate from the data coverage on the trend cards

Industry employment change over time

Year-over-year change for the industries that employ Financial managers in Michigan · percentage change

Year-over-year employment change (%) by reference quarter

Latest published values
  • Michigan · 2026 Q1+0.5%

The chart will load automatically. Published values remain available in this report.

Every published quarter

BLS does not publish a national quarterly series for this occupation’s industry mix, so only the Michigan series is shown. The U.S. figure on the cards above is the latest quarter benchmark.

Quarterly year-over-year industry employment change for Financial managers in Michigan, with the published state data coverage for each quarter
QuarterMichiganState data coverage
2024 Q2+0.1%91.07%
2024 Q3+0.1%91.07%
2024 Q4+0.3%91.07%
2025 Q10.0%91.07%
2025 Q2-0.1%91.07%
2025 Q3-0.5%91.07%
2025 Q4+0.1%91.07%
2026 Q1+0.5%91.07%

Industry mix behind this view

Which industries are weighted into this view. Not a ranking of employers or of job quality.

Industries weighted into the local context for Financial managers in Michigan
Industry groupShare of occupation employmentLocal employment changeEstablishmentsAvg. weekly wage
Financial activities35.2%+0.9%25,026$2,188
Professional and business services28.0%0.0%65,186$2,036
900000 Suppressed by BLS8.9%SuppressedSuppressedSuppressed
Trade, transportation, and utilities7.7%-0.7%55,698$1,258
Private education and health services5.7%+2.0%41,872$1,242
Manufacturing5.4%-0.9%20,584$1,774
QCEW release
QCEW 2026 Q1
Data period
January to March 2026
BLS publication date
August 28, 2026
Source verification
Not verified
Industry mix vintage
BLS-NEM-2025-35

The publication date above is the official BLS news release date for this reference quarter, linked to the notice. These values have not been matched to the independently verified snapshot. The data period above is the quarter the figures describe.

QCEW describes the industries that employ this occupation, not the occupation itself. It is not a count of job openings and is not part of the 0-100 Job Market Health score.

Evidence record

Derived by JobMarketHealth from BLS QCEW + published occupation industry mix. This is occupation-weighted industry context, not direct occupation employment and not a count of current job openings.

Occupation
Financial managers
SOC code
11-3031
State
Michigan
QCEW release label
QCEW 2026 Q1
Data period
2026 Q1
State industry employment, year over year
+0.5%State data coverage 91.07%
U.S. benchmark, year over year
0.0%
Difference from U.S. benchmark
+0.5 percentage pointsPercentage-point gaps use the original published values and are rounded once; subtracting the rounded percentages can give a slightly different result.
Establishments, year over year
+0.9%State data coverage 91.07%
Average weekly industry wage, year over year
+6.8%State data coverage 91.07%
Industry mix vintage
BLS-NEM-2025-35
BLS publication date
Aug 28, 2026
Canonical record URL
https://jobmarkethealth.com/occupations/financial-managers/michigan#evidence-record
Derived by
JobMarketHealth from BLS QCEW + published occupation industry mix

AI & this occupation

How AI relates to Financial managers work

Across 4 research exposure measures, Financial managers is in the middle technical AI exposure band based on the mean of the available source-specific percentile ranks. Exposure describes how much of the work the studied AI capabilities could technically assist with; it is not a forecast of job loss.

Observed use of Claude for this occupation's tasks is in the higher third of occupations in the Anthropic Economic Index, a dated observed task-exposure benchmark, not conversation share or the share of workers using AI. Its observation window is not recorded in this saved release.

In the task mix derived from the March 27, 2025 Anthropic release, 66.5% followed augmentation patterns (people iterating, validating or learning with AI), based on 10 matched tasks.

JobMarketHealth has not measured an AI effect on this occupation's employment or wages, and these figures do not enter its scores; there is no clear evidence of displacement in the data shown here.

Technical AI exposureMiddle exposureMean of 4 available source-specific percentile ranks (4 measures checked); fixed exposure bands, not a national rank of the composite
Dated Claude task exposureHigher thirdObserved task-exposure benchmark 0.391; observation window not recorded
Business AI use (BTOS Core)24.6%U.S. businesses using AI, two weeks ending 2026-10-04; all industries, not this occupation
Historical task mix (2025)66.5% augmentationMarch 27, 2025 release; 33.5% automation, 10 matched tasks
Measured labor-market effectNot estimatedJobMarketHealth does not attribute employment or wage changes to AI

Exposure measures (kept separate)

  • GPTs are GPTs exposure (β, GPT-4 rated): 0.48 of 1, national percentile 73 (higher third)
  • Microsoft AI applicability: 0.15 of 1, national percentile 52 (middle third)
  • AIOE (Felten, Raj & Seamans): 1.45 (standardized), national percentile 98 (higher third)
  • OECD AI Capability Gap (lower gap = higher potential exposure): gap 5.7 of 23, national percentile 19 (lower third)
OECD capability gap by domain

As published by the OECD: the gap between what the occupation demands (0-5) and current AI capability in each domain. A lower gap means AI is closer to the requirement (higher potential exposure); 0 means AI already meets it or the domain is not relevant.

  • Language: gap 1.00 (demand 4.00 of 5)
  • Social interaction: gap 2.00 (demand 4.00 of 5)
  • Problem solving: gap 1.95 (demand 3.95 of 5)
  • Creativity: gap 0.00 (demand 2.15 of 5)
  • Metacognition & critical thinking: gap 2.25 (demand 4.25 of 5)
  • Knowledge, learning & memory: gap 0.90 (demand 3.90 of 5)
  • Vision: gap 0.00 (demand 0.05 of 5)
  • Manipulation: gap 0.00 (demand 0.00 of 5)
  • Robotic intelligence: gap 0.00 (demand 0.00 of 5)

National context: what businesses used generative AI for

From the Census 2025-26 BTOS AI Supplement (all industries; businesses whose employees used generative AI). Census did not measure Financial managers specifically.

  • Writing or editing documents, emails, or communications: 85.4%
  • Searching for information or technical help: 49.9%
  • Interpreting, analyzing, translating, or summarizing documents: 44.6%
  • Information processing, paperwork, or filing: 34.7%

Michigan context

In the Census BTOS core AI-use question, an estimated 22.8% of Michigan employer businesses reported using AI in the two weeks ending 2026-10-04 (U.S.: 24.6%).

Separately, the one-time 2025-26 BTOS AI Supplement (collected 2025-11-17 to 2026-02-08) found 14.7% of Michigan businesses using AI at that time, and 18.6% reporting that employees used generative AI for work tasks in the prior six months. It describes how AI was being used then, not a trend.

Using each occupation's exposure band and Michigan employment weights (OEWS May 2025), 30.0% of covered jobs are in occupations in the higher-exposure band. This describes the state's occupation mix, not a measured AI effect.

Exposure and observed usage are separate measures and neither equals job loss. Census BTOS figures are business-level surveys and are not occupation-specific. Sources: GPTs are GPTs occupation exposure; Microsoft Working with AI: AI applicability; AI Occupational Exposure (AIOE); OECD AI Exposure Measure (AI Capability Gap); Anthropic Economic Index; Census BTOS Core AI Use; Census BTOS AI Supplement 2025-26. These figures do not affect Job Market Health scores. Explore AI & Jobs · How we use AI data.

How to read this page

QCEW measures employment and wages by industry, not by occupation. We weight those industry conditions using the published industry mix for Financial managers. These figures describe the industries that employ Financial managers; they are not direct counts of people working in the occupation or of jobs currently open. This page is not part of the national 0 to 100 Job Market Health score.

Source: BLS QCEW. See the methodology, the national Financial managers report and about the data.

Compare Michigan with other statesPublished industry employment, business locations and average weekly industry wages for up to three states, with the national benchmark in percentage points.

Financial managers in other states