The purpose of the paper is a comparative analysis of Marxian, Neoclassical and Institutional approaches to the problem of equivalence of income distribution in modern market economy, and description of their advantages and shortcomings, and determination of perspectives of institutional approach for further analysis.There were revealed two groups of interpretation of equivalence: based on the cost and based on the productivity. For the purpose of development of the last approach there was created an econometric model for Russian economy, founded on the Cobb-Douglas function, coefficients of which in their comparison with factual distribution proportions enables to asses the level of nonequivalence. There was investigated a correspondence between equivalence and equality in income distribution. The Kuznets curve for Russian economy was developed, and the multiple regression between GDP based on purchasing- power-parity per capita and Index of quality of institutions and Gini coefficient was offered and tested for 134 countries.The author proves that main advantage of Marxist approach consists in admission of nonequivalence itself, whereas its shortcomings are denial of productivity of other factors apart from labor, miss of their historical transformation and phenomenon of factor’s income diffusion. Advantage of neoclassical approach consists in possible quantitative assessment of factors contribution, and shortcomings of it are: appearance of essential residual in such models, and notion that equilibrium to be an attainment of objective function of one factor under limitations set by others, and equalization of equilibrium, equivalence and fairness, and spreading of exchange transactions through all the sphere of distribution. There were established main directions of analysis of income distribution by using institutional methodology: division of different types of transactions within sphere of distribution, determination of social and ethic institutions influence, and influence of property rights specification, their «great transformation» in corporations on performance of this sphere. Specific institutions of creation and appropriation of organizational rent were revealed.