> CEOs are rich so they are successful.

"Successful" in which sense?

The most reasonable definition "Successful in convincing other people to give them money" is rather a tautology. :-)

A very related problem concerning your argument is well-known for decades: the Principal–agent problem:

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal%E2%80%93agent_proble...

It says that the self-interest of an agent (e.g. the CEO) is not identical to the interests of the principal (e.g. the shareholders).

Why do I mention this? The CEO being rich is a measurement of the financial success of the agent, but not of the principal. You are rather interested in measuring the success of the principal.

Maybe in your fantasy world.

In reality people are rarely rich based on merit alone.

EDIT: Sorry it was a really clever joke.