Insight vs Top EB/BB
Repost for traction. Just received an offer from a top bb/eb. I know long term my goal is tech investing in most likely the venture/growth stage although I’m open to tech buyout as well. I want to see if I can use my offer to accelerate insight but I’m curious how people in this forum view insight in terms of comp, prestige, exits, etc. Hoping someone at the firm can comment on current analyst comp. Is insight one of the best firms out there and I should try to accelerate no doubt or would it be smarter to do on cycle and get something much better? Any help would be really great
Based on the most helpful WSO content, let's break down your query regarding Insight Partners versus top bulge bracket (BB) or elite boutique (EB) banks, focusing on compensation, prestige, exits, and overall firm reputation, especially in the context of tech investing.
Compensation:
Prestige and Firm Reputation:
Exits:
Strategic Considerations:
In conclusion, both paths have their merits. If you're certain about your passion for tech investing, accelerating your offer with Insight might be a strategic move. However, if you value a broader finance foundation and the prestige associated with top BB/EB banks, starting there could also serve your long-term goals well. Ultimately, it depends on your career priorities and how you weigh the immediate specialization versus a broader finance foundation.
Sources: Anyone have info on Insight Partners?, URGENT: Take offer at Insight or UMM fund?, EY vs. PwC vs. Accenture?, Prestige ranking among consulting firms
If you for sure want a career in venture/growth, no question in my mind to go with Insight. It has one of the best if not the best analyst programs in VC (Bessemer would be the other one I'd consider top tier). Go with banking though if you want more optionality to do PE or HF for example, which Insight won't prepare you well for.
Would it still be possible for hf exits considering sm hf modeling is a lot less intense than PE?
Possible yes but tricky. I agree in theory the skillset should be transferable but if you go through some HF profiles it's rarely a thing. But probably also because VC is the exit and generally cozier all things considered so there's just less movement.
People have gone to Coatue and other crossover funds. Think a head or two has ended up at Tiger? idk it happens but its not the most typical outcome (which self-selection is another big factor in).
any clue on comp at the analyst level?
Have heard it’s 200k all in + sourcing bonuses and phantom carry. Pretty nice food/drink stipend as well.
If you want to do tech investing then start investing in tech. Banks are banks. It’s for banking. You can bank tech but it’s different to tech investing (I recognize it might sound like I am splitting hairs here but it’s different in the long run).
if needed you can also learn how to model (I.e. advanced writing numbers down on a fancy piece of paper) later on. Tech investing is more about finding good tech and investing in it. The financial models aren’t as important. A good tech investor basically can do the financial models in their head (I.e we can sell everyone on earth 1 of these awesome tech widgets and make $1 of profit on each sale) or just figure it out later. Big banks have much more of a need for big complicated spreadsheets to manage / understand the business and money flows etc.
just my humble opinion.
good luck
Specifically on tech investing, there’s a lot of different flavors to it — the mental models differ from early-stage venture to follow-on growth to traditional buyout, not to mention it’s also industry dependent (i.e., vertical/horizontal saas, data/infra, etc.). With that said, Insight is a great and very reputable firm, where you’re bound to learn lots and have deep coverage across tech. Obvious callout here is they’re venture focused so may be harder to pivot to other stages of investing after.
The interesting part about Insight is it does all of these things. It does seed, it does follow on growth (often on the companies it seeded itself), and it does buyout. They just did two pretty sizable buyouts / take privates with carlyle and clearlake in the past few months.
If you are cool you will take Insight and not regret it.
why
if ur cool, you will know why. Also good luck breaking back into Insight on cycle lmao
I would go with the top BB/EB if it's MS Tech, GS TMT, or Q. If not, then go with Insight. I think those shops will actually open up more doors and tbh I think Insight's program is a little overrated. You're just a sourcing monkey and I understand that's really important for venture, but if you work at a top VC firm you probably aren't doing too much sourcing because the dealflow comes to you, so what's more important is actually understanding how to evaluate companies and developing pattern recognition. You don't get to do this with Insight because after sourcing the DGS analysts take over after you've sourced the deal and it's been approved by IC. The days of just sourcing to become a VC are over – you need to be able to analyze companies critically. Also, Insight is doing really bad right now relative to other VC and growth shops. Source: I went to a buyside program and now work at a top VC firm/crossover.
My offer is one of Evercore/Lazard/moelis and I’m confident I can get tech placement. So you would say unless it’s one of the three best tech bankin groups out there, it’s definitely the better move to try to accelerate insight?
Also frankly Analyst 1 in PE - Other, with the questions this kid asking, we need not be worried about their ability to get critical thinking reps in. Independent thinking doesn't really seem to be their forte. You are speaking to someone who probably made their college decision off of which school was 1 or two places higher on US news ranking lol
This person probably won't even get the Insight offer.
So it is your belief that sifting through 1000s of companies to find those few diamonds in the rough to ultimately then build a thesis / pitch around for the IC, one effective enough that it actually goes through, in no way challenges your ability to analyze a company, think about markets, and have some semblance of pattern recognition? hmm yeah that makes sense. it definitely must be that Insight's in house MBB division that is literally there to do m&a work for portcos is ruining this whole gig. I guess all the people at tiger are also getting nothing from their experience because they throw MBB consultants at their portcos for ops work instead of being on twitter all day like a16z junior partners (and GPs lol).
You 1000% do not work at a tier 1 VC it is just a laughable proposition with the nonsense you just spewed. How's the cafeteria at Brown university looking rn as u type this shit? Oh and remind me, who are all those VC and growth shops killing Insight? oh you mean like just TA. I guess founders fund cutting their fund in half, kkr cutting their funds, blackstone growth going up in literal flames, GA stagnant, Tiger and coatue fucking shitting the bed, andreessen fucking shitting the bed (bye bye crypto team). yeah guess none of that happened.
Can't imagine it's radically different for JMI / Summit frankly. Anyone who touched software investing in 2021 got burned. And of them, Insight is easily one of the more intelligent investors with one of the most impressive long term track records. Couldn't be more obvious you have never weathered a storm and are upset you are at a worse firm than Insight (if you have even graduated college) now.
That said, Q is 100% worth looking at. Would take that over any other bank easily. MS tech less so. GS TMT yeah would consider that strongly but not as much as Q
Hey man, I know you think you're onto something but there are a few things that you're grossly incorrect about. First off, Insight's program is NOT finding diamonds in the rough. It's more tossing everything at the dart board and hoping something sticks – most of the analysts' job is just finding a company that isn't already in their CRM, NOT thinking critically about whether it's going to be a unicorn or standalone company (this is because of how populated their CRM is) Being a volume investor doesn't make you a good investor. Regardless of how much you try and clown me and where I went out of college (which I think almost everyone would choose the shop I went to over Insight except retarded people like you – if you think I'm lying, reply unanonymously and I can send over my offer letters), there's a reason that Tiger is getting fucked. Being an index for private tech companies is not a sound investment strategy and honestly, the only two firms that really did that were Tiger and Insight. You would know that if you actually worked in the industry.
Since you asked, on the buyout side, Insight is getting eaten alive by TA, Vista, and Thoma which is pretty embarrassing given how bad the last two are doing relative to their standard state. On the venture side, across stages, 8VC, BOND, IVP, KP, NEA, Index, and Accel are all faring far better than Insight. This is just off the top of my head, if you give me time I could literally list 15-20 brand-name VC firms that are doing better than Insight right now. Also, FF cutting its fund size in half is not the same as Insight being able to only raise $2B because the FF fund that you're talking about is their early-stage fund. If you know anything about venture then you know that fund size doesn't correlate to quality (just look at KP and Benchmark) on the early stage side of things. Also, you didn't even mention how FF is keeping their growth fund the same size. A fund of Insight's caliber only being able to raise $2B is laughable and embarrassing, and if you actually work in the industry and have taken a look at some of their portcos you would know how much deep shit they're in right now given the markdowns.
OP here's a prime example of why you shouldn't go into banking. There are a plethora of dumbasses like this guy who yap about investing and industries even though they've never done it since their witty bitty college hedge fund. Saying that I haven't weathered a storm because I am rightfully harsh on Insight is clown shit. The fact that you're cock sucking them so hard tells me you're a bull market monkey who doesn't actually want to think critically about companies. I certainly hope that you're not in venture right now because you're probably just as good of an investor as a goldfish.
Sourcing is super important - always has been and always will be. It's a complete myth that top VC firms don't do any outbound sourcing. Top partners at Benchmark (Fenton, Gurley) and Sequoia (Goetz, Roelof, Alfred) have said publicly many times that they do a tremendous amount of outbound sourcing. Top deals don't just show up at your door until they're deep in a process, at which point you're not in a position to win if you haven't already been building a relationship with the founder earlier. Top investors at top firms are relentless with sourcing.
Pattern recognition comes from seeing many deals. Even more of a reason to start in venture earlier. By the time your banking buddies join after 2 years making pitchbooks, you'll have met hundreds, if not thousands, of founders. Not to mention the network you start building. 2 years is an eternity in startup land. Having that heard start compounds over your whole career. Take it from someone who did a banking stint and entered VC later - I really really wish I had joined VC earlier. If you absolutely want to have a career in venture (not buyouts or public investing at hedge funds, that's a different story), and you have an offer from Insight, the only rational reason to turn it down would be if you got an offer at Sequoia or Benchmark. Aside from Bessemer, which I'd say is also top tier, there aren't structured VC analyst training programs that are anywhere near as good or reputable.
Eum sunt ab sit. Quisquam quia natus tempore natus quas. Minus ea animi quis eum omnis consequatur tenetur illo. Consequatur incidunt tempore id dicta. Vitae quo eaque deleniti minus est non. Sed qui est aliquam et quod ad adipisci. Exercitationem dicta ut qui iure pariatur.
Et omnis error iusto corrupti est optio deleniti. Officia sequi doloremque quia qui voluptatem earum quia. Blanditiis quo sunt et. Sed quam incidunt sed laborum qui incidunt repudiandae. Voluptas beatae eos ab rerum ut id maiores.
Animi quaerat qui vitae aliquid. Aliquid voluptatem aliquam odit iusto vel nulla omnis minima. Et asperiores ab qui et. Ad rerum ipsa qui totam itaque. Est soluta maxime est beatae rem delectus eligendi.
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...