Is it a compensatory strategy if you choose to do it? I’m going to say no.

“Neutral” is an ideal starting point. You’re equidistant to either end of the movement curve in the middle, so can make adjustments more easily and can access both extremes as needed.

Driving to either end of the ROM curve then is a choice we want to try and make, rather than a compensatory strategy we end up with.

In my pull-up here, I’m favoring a more extending lumbar position. This allows me to leverage my mid-back in a particular way to create certain lines of pull and stress. I want that. I can control this position (this is a key factor) and so there would be no reason for me to NEED to keep my back neutral (prove me wrong).

In the bench lying skull crusher and bench press here I’m favoring a more neutral position because, again, it helps me target my intended muscles specifically.

In my reciprocal rows here, I’m favoring a more flexed position, again, this isn’t an accident. It allows me to reach and stretch my lats a little more, and therefore target the desired muscles.

TL;DR?

Context is key. Choosing to be in a certain position to drive towards a specific outcome might look different, and neutral is a great starting place for most if not all movements.