Primaries & secondaries analyst comp + exit opps?
Hello fellow monkeys. Curious if anyone has insights on comp (bonus range, total comp) and exit opps from an analyst position at a top secondaries shop in the US (think Ardian/BX/GS) out of undergrad?
Would skipping IB and going into secondaries directly cut you off from buyouts PE or direct investing roles down the line?
Many thanks in advance!
Junior comp is similar to EB banking, strong exits to direct do happen (mainly from the top funds you mentioned) but nothing much outside of the PE universe. A top IB role would give you more optionality.
Thanks so much! But how would you weight it compared to a lower tier BB or MM IB role?
IB would provide more optionality as mentioned, but joining one of the top 3 funds you mentioned is a rare opportunity in a growing space as they don't often hire laterals. It comes down to personal preference but if you have absolutely no interest in secondaries, you're better off going the banking route.
If you’re interested in directs, would not recommend starting in secondaries. Exits to directs from secondaries are very rare and likely only happen if you have prior direct experience.
Yes, agreed 100% that banking provides better options for directs down the line. To say that exits to direct are "very rare" would be false when looking at analyst exits from top players like GS or BX. You just don't come across them much because their class sizes are quite small. The more senior you get, the tougher it is to leave secondaries of course.
Thanks! Curious if the brand name at the top secondaries shop would help if you stay for just the analyst years? Or maybe transition to direct post-BSchool?
According to the other commenter, maybe it does (not gonna go on a LinkedIn rabbit hole to confirm his claim).
There’s two reasons why you don’t see people go from secondaries to directs that often:
1. People generally like secondaries and get paid well enough for better hours and don’t want to leave.
2. The skill set is very different compared to directs. While there is modeling in secondaries it’s usually fund level modeling (LP-leds) in which case it’s not relevant to directs at all or asset level modeling (GP-leds) but it’s higher level than directs or leveraging an existing model provided by the GP. You’re a passive investor so your diligence will be at higher level than direct investing so again, you’re at a disadvantage.
Secondaries is a great place to be (I enjoy it a lot and want to build a career in it). But if directs is you’re long term goal, I wouldn’t suggest anyone coming out of school start in secondaries. If you go to B-school, sure you could maybe pivot but why set yourself up to have to take on student loans, take off work, etc. only for a maybe you can get into directs. To give yourself the best chance, starting in M&A is a better bet.
Thank you, super helpful! But say the role involves primaries and secondaries half half, versus another option in a lower tier BB or MM for IB, what would you recommend? The consideration for the IB route would be no WLB, worse name brand, uncertainty about group placement, difficulty of lateraling in the current market etc... Would greatly appreciate your input!
The answer is still largely the same. WLB is worse but MM IB will be the better option. It’s been said by several others but I’ll reiterate the fact that primiaries and secondaries is a fundamentally different job than being an analyst or associate at a traditional PE firm. Not a better to worse job just different. LBO modeling / data analysis isn’t rocket science and anyone could learn within a short time frame for an interview. M&A experience gives you a better understanding of a transaction from start to finish and the dynamics that exist between different parties. That’s probably the biggest difference I notice from consultants vs bankers as well. Consultants are typically sharp and motivated enough to nail modeling, IC decks, analysis but struggle at first seeing “the bigger picture” and managing the various work streams that come into play.
Again, answering this from the prospective of trying to get to direct PE. If half your time is spent working on primaries it’s even less likely. Primaries are very far from the type of work you would do in direct PE.
Look, I won’t tell you which career path to choose because that all depends on what your own goals and interests are. I will say this, if you’re at a brand name (BX, GS) doing primaries and secondaries you’ll build great experience for a successful career in finance. So many people on this forum get caught chasing “the path” to PE only to be disappointed because they have no life outside of work and underestimated just how hard it is to “make it”.
If you truly want to work in finance, there are roles out there that pay well, have good WLB and are intellectually stimulating. You won’t be dumb rich but you’ll be well off and have a life.
Deserunt nostrum dicta et ullam aperiam aut ea. Non mollitia perferendis nihil eius. A vitae occaecati modi nihil.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...