Advantages and disadvantages of private boutiques vs. large bulge brackets?
Hey guys. I was just wondering what are some of the advantages/disadvantages of mid-sized private boutiques such as Needham vs. the large public bulge brackets? Comparatively, how are the hours, the pay, experience, and exit opps?
Thanks!
you should use the search box; this topic has definitely been discussed before.
Honestly who cares? Get an offer first.
boutique vs bulge... (Originally Posted: 02/01/2011)
Why don't any of the top candidates want to go to bulge brackets anymore?
I am at the top target school and I'm currently recruiting for SA. The top candidates who are getting multiple second rounds at my school are all looking at and leaning towards places like Greenhill, BX, Moelis, Evercore, etc. over places like MS, GS, JPM, CS and other bulge brackets.
I dont quite understand the trend here but it definitely seems a lot different than what the juniors I knew were doing when I was a freshman and sophomore. Back then, it seemed like all the top kids would go to the bulge brackets based on league tables and everything else was secondary. What has caused this change? Is the experience really that better at these elite boutiques? Has anyone else noticed this shift?
I know there are multiple threads on elite boutique vs top bulge brackets but I feel now more than ever it is wide out in the open that the boutiques have captured the preference of the best of the best. Please enlighten me.
Deal exposure.
A lot of kids are going to BBs too... Everyone is going to have their own unique reasons for choosing the firm they choose. Maybe they got into a phenomenal group at an elite boutique and they love the team and culture. It isn't like there is a massive phase shift toward boutiques over BBs. You will still see top candidates going to both and for different reasons...
^agreed
If you want to do sellside M&A or restructuring, go with a boutique. Otherwise, it seems to me like BB is still the place to start your career. More resources, better training, guaranteed deal flow...
Probably depends on the boutique. Places like Blackstone M&A are probably up there with the top bulge brackets.
Really surprises me that so many people here have a hard-on for BX M&A... Their PE arm without a doubt deserves its stellar reputation, but their M&A platform is certainly inferior to the other elite boutiques and most bulge brackets. Go ahead, peg me with your ape shit.
The world is changing and boutiques are a much bigger force, at least in in the US.
Let's back this up with evidence for a change. Let's look at the "elite boutiques" -- arbitrarily defined as Moelis, Evercore, Perella Weinberg, Greenhill, Centerview and Blackstone -- separately from Lazard and Rothschild, which are a bit of a different animal. Then let's look at the M&A fees generated by these boutiques, as a % of the M&A fees generated by BB's, for announced transactions involving a US company as either the acquirer or target -- and how these numbers have changed over the last 5 years:
"Elite" boutiques 2006: 3.3% 2007: 3.2% 2008: 3.5% 2009: 11.8% 2010: 10.2%
Lazard/Rothschild 2006: 6.9% 2007: 7.1% 2008: 7.3% 2009: 11.8% 2010: 8.5%
(all data from Thomson Reuters)
This analysis far from perfect (eg, Moelis wasn't around in 2006), but it supports the story that boutiques have stolen a large amount of market share from BB's in the past few years. NB, they have done this while typically operating at higher revenue/headcount, ie they are more profitable.
One could make the case that more revenue/headcount translates into a better learning experience for a new banker. One could also make the case that GS TMT is, and will continue to be the best choice w/r/t exit ops.
Survivorship bias perhaps?
Might be more interesting to see if BB market share is going down.
voltaire -- I agree BX M&A doesn't have great deal flow, but if you check linkedin pretty much every analyst lands at a top HF/PE, which you can't say for pretty much any other firm. At the same time, they probably have the most qualified analysts so those analysts probably could have landed at those funds anyway.
You definitely do get a better experience at boutiques. Think about it this way, you are the M&A analyst AND the industry analyst, meaning you will do the work of both and learn the skillsets of both. Also, you are not precluded from any industry verticals, as well as restructuring, which is especially important if you want to do PE because you understand capital structure inside out
If you are an M&A analyst at a bulge, you are running useless acc/dils all day If you are an industry analyst at a bulge, you will be spread comps/making pitchbooks/turning comments all day If you are an M&A analyst within an industry vertical at a bulge, you will not get exposure to other industry groups
Lazard is not a fucking boutique. They are bigger than a BB's M&A group (20+ first years) Evercore is not a fucking boutique. They are bigger than a BB's M&A group (18 first years)
PWP is a fairness shop - specialize in fairness opinions (2 weeks of hell and a bag of peanuts for pay). They are also paid lower quarterly/yearly retainers than other boutiques on the street for "strategic advisory" work. One of their analysts is an idiot and showed me one of their engagement letters. Fuck the NDA right? lol
Moelis gets some ad hoc creditor side tertiary roles on bigger restructuring deals (General Growth - Miller Buckfire did 95%+ of the debtor side work, Dubai - Rothchild/Deloitte did 90%+ of the work) Not hating on Moelis, just speaking the truth
Blackstone, Centerview, Greenhill and Gleacher are true boutiques.
Think about the bullshit that's spread here in your head. If you can't make a sound judgment, maybe you don't deserve an offer at one of these places.
Signed, Second year going to $10bn+ PE shop
Slightly off-topic - I've seen Lazard considered separately from other boutiques before, but Rothschild as well? Is this how many of you see it? I'd always thought (from these boards mostly) that Rothschild was either at the lower edge of 'top-tier' boutiques, or at the higher edge of 'second-tier' boutiques...
dublin, you shouldn't take everything put here for granted. In Europe, Rothschild is regarded as a very prestigeous bank, definitely on par with Lazard reputation-wise. In the US, this bank doesn't have such a strong platform as of yet - hence the impression you might've got at these forums (which are clearly USA-focused).
Also, it's the oldest (existing) investment bank in the world, so to speak, and by far the oldest - should mean something.
the average analyst at a boutique will have better exit ops than the average analyst in a bulge bracket, especially since a lot of the groups in non GS/MS BBs are not great for exit ops
bunkerbanker, don't mean to burst your bubble but none of us are gonna rub one out thinking about your $10bn megafund job.
From your previous posts, it's obvious you work at BX m&a. You should shy away from telling prospective analysts that the work you do at a bulge is useless, seeing as you've never worked in one full-time and your last job at a BB was most likely as an intern. And to prevent any confusion among aspiring college students, Lazard, Evercore, PWP, Moelis, etc are ALL boutiques seeing as they don't dabble much in S&T or Capital Markets. To add to that, they are all great boutiques and you should definitely think twice before turning any of them down.
Voltaire I agree with what you are trying to say here, but Rothschild/Lazard are not really boutique banks in any sense of the word besides the fact that they don't use their Balance Sheet, so seperating them from other non-BB firms was well-founded. They do megadeals and consistently beat out many BB on mandates. These organisations have 30+ offices all around the world and 2,000+ professionals.
So no confusion is caused amongst college students Rothschild/Lazard are not BB and are not Boutiques, they honestly, as was stated before, are a different animal and the last large independent advisory firms remaining. Not to mention Lazard has an Asset Management Arm with $150bn+...
Anyways who really cares what they are called they are great firms as Voltaire alluded to, but just thought this point was worth mentioning.
Totally agree with Ivan. Rothschild is a tier 1 boutique in Europe and currently expanding its business in the Middle East and Asia.
bunkerbanker seems to know what he's talking about. And BX M&A is pretty legit from what I've heard/read. Ridiculous exit opps, basically interviews with whoever you want, above street comp (though that seems pretty common among elite boutiques), and prestigious as hell brand name.
I do agree though that work at BB's isn't useless, although I could see how you might not get as much training/experience working in the larger deal teams
They may be boutique, but that doesn't mean they are interested in boutique dollars
thanks for the explanation re: Lazard/Rothschild - appreciate the perspective
I have worked at a mid-size European full service IB, an 'elite' boutique and a BB.
Reality - life was easier at the Euro IB and the 'elite' boutique. Less product, less dealflow, less hours.
Note - I always sat in sector coverage teams (although both at the Euro IB and the boutique it was pretty much all M&A)
At the BB I get true exposure to a multi-product platform and am exposed to capital markets as much as M&A. It is better overall experience and will make you far more rounded as a banker (a true corporate financier so to say, with advisory skills)
Boutiques are great - but just M&A can get boring quickly. I am happier at a BB although I work harder.
I have never run into Blackstone M&A, on any deal, in my career. Not once.
We once hired a banker from there to do middle market M&A work for us. He struck me as being a typical middle market M&A type.
Top Boutique v. Bulge Bracket M&A Group (Associate Level) (Originally Posted: 01/31/2011)
Hey guys, through a lot of networking and some blind luck I have been lucky enough to secure offers to join either a top boutique (Greenhill/Evercore/Blackstone) or Citi's M&A group at the Associate level.
What would you guys choose if you were in my shoes?
Before the recruiting season started, I didn't know much about the boutiques so I'm not sure which option makes more sense from a career development or an exit opportunities perspective.
The 3 boutiques you mentioned are more prestigious than Citi.
Yeah, that's what a lot of people on the board seem to think, but I didn't know how to compare them to Citi's M&A group, which is historically pretty solid, but seems to have hit hard times lately . . .
An associate right out of undergrad? Would you be an analyst at the boutique? Do exit opps still matter at the associate level?
No, I'm in business school, but at a non-core school that doesn't send many into i-banking or boutiques so I don't have many 2nd years with a solid perspective on how the boutiques compare.
.
Rhetorical question.
I wish it was but I decided to enter the i-banking lotto a bit late in the game and am still in the process of gathering intelligence.
Bulge Bracket Public Finance vs. Niche Boutique M&A - FT Offer (Originally Posted: 02/22/2013)
I have an offer with one of the industry leaders in public finance (GS/JPM/CS), as well as a niche market M&A boutique. The niche is probably most comparable to corporate retail. Which opportunity is better in terms of training, exit ops, grad school prospects, etc.?
M&A is better all around
SA or FT?
FT
Bueller???
how did you get the BB FT offer so late in the game son?
M&A. Public Finance blows.
There was a girl that did public finance at JPM for 8 or 9 years before going back to grad school. She had a very difficult time getting interviews for traditional IB.
BB for the brand name and try to lateral somewhere later. BB also likely to provide better B school prospects because of name.
From people I have spoken with, they say BB would be better for B school, but the downfall with public finance is the lack of integrated modelling. With M&A I would at least get transaction modelling experience. Didn't have an IB internship junior year, so LinkedIn creeping/networking and applying for every single IBD opening was the strategy.
don't know anything about JP/CS, but GS has a formal internal mobility program and you will easily be able to switch into something more appealing like traditional IBD after 2 years. just something to think about.
If the boutique has any name value then go M&A. Mostly depends on what you want to do later...
Public Finance is interesting stuff. I would go Public Finance route due to volatility of deal flow at boutique M&A shops. I say this due to being at a MM M&A Firm (in Chicago) that had to let people go (including myself) due to not having enough deals coming in.
Boutique vs. Bulge Bank (Originally Posted: 04/05/2007)
If I have the opportunity to pursue an analyst position out of Undergrad at a Regional Boutique in Chicago(houlihan howard lokey & zukin)or a Bulge Bank (JP Morgan) what would you suggest? How do salaries, quality of life, deal flow/execution compare? Thanks for the help.
http://www.leveragedsellout.com/2005/09/the-boutique/
ive heard that houlihan sucks in Chicago. you get killed and its super technical
Hours are better than most on average. The guys I know there get out between 9-12 most nights. It's no more technical than any other place. Banking is banking.
Going from a big shop to a small shop is easy, but from a small shop to a big shop can be harder. since your straight from undergrad, id recommend working for the bb. you could probably get "closer to the action" at a boutique, but i think it would be helpful to get a lot more transaction experience working for the bb.
Top end boutiques vs Bulge Bracket (Originally Posted: 06/08/2010)
Most of the threads on this topic are debates about deal flow, exit opps, inflated senses of self-worth etc, but I'm more interested in how the top end boutiques (GH, Laz, etc) and the bulge bracket banks differ in terms of amenities, like subsidised gym membership, 401k and healthcare plans, reduced interest loans, etc. For example, I know BAML have a great dental health plan for their employees, and they even have a clinic in their London office.
Most of the bulge bracket banks have clinics in their office... not because its a cushy perk, but because it reduces the necessity to take a full or half day off from work for a doctor's appointment. Same thing with health club membership: you stay healthier = reduced insurance costs.
Boutique vs. Bulge (Originally Posted: 09/12/2008)
I know this question has been partially answered on before, but I Have a different spin on the question. Top boutqiues (Evercore, Greenhill) vs top bulge brackets (GS, MS but not on top teams).... which is the smarter choice in the current markets?
so where's the different spin? I just see the same old question.
depends on where you think you'll get the best experience and learn the most. honestly, if you're choosing between Evercore, Greenhill, (i'll throw in Lazard) and GS and MS, you're going to get a great experience and have great exit opps.
just look at the people and see who you'll enjoy working with the most.
in the current market conditions, i think the elite boutiques are the safest (and therefore) the best choice
if you need to expand on this, send me a pm
I would agree with PatrickBateman. Smaller firms have largely avoided the crisis. Although business has slowed, the impact is nowhere near what we've seen with the BBs.
I would go to a top boutique anytime before a BB at this point...
Hate boutique, would I like Bulge? (Originally Posted: 07/10/2012)
I'm currently a summer analyst at a boutique Ibank, it has roughly 250 employees, to give a impression of the size.
Heres what I don't like about it, categorized
The Job:
I use my brain 0% of the time. I don't problem solve, model, or do any thinking. I make powerpoint decks and gather market research.
I don't like sitting for 11 hours a day. NOTE: I DO NOT mind the hours themselves
I don't like that original, creative, possibly risky ideas are not valued
The Firm:
None of the analysts hang out with each other on the weekends or during the week
They say summer is slow but theres been nights where I leave at 8pm. And most of the time I am the last analyst to stay in the office (latest so far has been 11:30pm) Yes. I dislike the LACK of hours, I wanted the true experience of the life of the analyst and I don't feel like I'm getting it.
Senior members have left the firm without so much as a goodbye. Just an empty office for more than a week is what notifies us that someone has left
Now I think finance is interesting, I think modeling is interesting, and I like to work hard. But what I am lost about is am I just not fit for investment banking because there is a fair amount of the corporate lifestyle I really don't like? Or is this just a typical experience at a boutique and at a bulge, while you work longer its all around more stressful, its very different.
Basically I'm trying to figure out my future plans for recruiting. Any thoughts on whether management consulting would be different?
Thanks!
Every boutique is a different breed. I thought the same thing when I started my summer internship. Out a 5? 6? 7 is a late night?! Not that the guys I work with aren't motivated, but there just isn't the need. I was dedicated to being the first one in, last one out just out of principle.
It doesn't have to be a boutique versus BB thing, it could be THIS boutique. I'm at a quite smaller firm, and I enjoy the interactions I get to have with everyone.
Going through your points, why do you have to be sitting for 11 hours? Take a walk, make the rounds with some people you could possibly hang out with to resolve your other issue with the firm. As for your Third Point about not liking the job; I doubt a BB is going to respond better to your "original, creative, possibly risky ideas"...in fact, a boutique is where an individual like you may thrive.
.
just sounds like a shitty boutique
yeah i think its the boutique itself. i kno analysts at FBR capital markets in arlington work 9-5. no wonder they are going downhill.
Internship: Big Names vs. Boutique Shops (Originally Posted: 07/28/2010)
Hi all,
This is my first post - any help/advice/opinion greatly appreciated. I recently started looking into quant finance internships for summer 2011 and compiled an extensive list of companies that I would be interested in working for (which I might post in one form or another at some point). Right now I'm trying to narrow it down and I found that most of them are either big name IB/PE firms or smaller boutique trading shops (think Jump Trading, Jane Street, Getco, etc.). Personally, I feel like the latter group might be more interesting/challenging from a quant point of view, in particular all the high-frequency/algo trading stuff, but since this will be my first internship in finance I am wondering if it's strategically better to go for a well-established big name. Not sure, but it seems like getting a good introduction to finance at a large company plus having a well-respected name on my resume offsets the more fun work at an algo trader. Any thoughts? Does anybody have any experience with internships at smaller firms? Btw my background: BS., MS. in physics (top school in Switzerland, GPA 3.9), currently 3rd year PhD student in physics (top 3 Ivy, GPA 4.0); did a MBB consulting internship in undergrad and a VC internship last summer (mostly early stage start-ups, patent law, etc.).
many thanks
TOO LONG DIDN'T READ
/thread
I'll address the point you bring up in going to a large company vs. fun work as an algo trader at small prop-shop. You need to do what you want and not what someone else thinks will look good.
Some hypothetical situations:
Let's say you did a stint at Morgan Stanley but you hated it and only did it for the big name. You probably won't get much from it and you will most likely do horrible in a full-time interview (when it really counts) because you can't show passion or real interest for what you did over the summer. Wasted time, really…
Now let's say you did some algo-type summer stint at a small shop; something you would enjoy from what I gather (correct me if I'm wrong). I am willing to bet you would be able to convey some sort of passion and legitimate understanding of what you did over the summer in a full-time interview. You would have an easier time discussing your experience at said-firm and you would come off as a more interesting individual to the person holding the interview.
I will say that in my life I have done things (wasted time) to "pad" a resume because I thought it would look good to others and not because I had a strong desire of what I was doing. In the long run I was even more miserable of what I got myself into than if I had done what I originally wanted. Just go for what is important to you and forget what others are going to think. Not everyone who works at Goldman Sachs is happy with that job; some just do it because it's something to impress at a cocktail party.
[/2cents]
Thanks, that's a good point. I agree that it doesn't make much sense to do an internship simply for the big name. As of now, I just don't have a good idea of how smaller prop shops are viewed in the industry, i.e. what the various companies reputations are and if they're considered desired places to work at. It's all a little more opaque in a sense that I don't have a clear image of what life is like at a small prop/algo trader (as opposed to the many stereotypes that come to mind for big IBs ) . Don't want to end up at a boutique firm that goes bust 6 months later or has a bad reputation in the industry.
The boutique prop-shops you mentioned in your original post all seem to have some reputation and staying power, so I wouldn't worry about them blowing up so soon. Maybe political repercussions could have an effect on them but you are going to need to speak to someone with more knowledge on that.
Whichever top three Ivy you are at will most likely have an excellent business department so I would check with a career counselor there to get a better idea of what you are looking for. They could shed some light and give you the real scoop on prop-shops (more so than the many disgruntled and inexperienced sophomores on this site who aspire to be the proverbial "badass" or "baller" in their career). I would also look through your alumni data bases to make some contacts at the places you are interested in; they are always eager to help aspiring alum.
The professionals who use this site are also a great asset for information. Lurk around the site for a couple of weeks and you may find some great info overtime.
SA Boutique VS Bulge Experiences (Originally Posted: 07/11/2012)
Hi
I'm working at a boutique (250 employees) and my roommate is working at a bulge bank.
Were comparing experiences and they seem to be very different. He has had to do the "monkey work" as well but currently hes been given a project to make an lbo model, partially from scratch.
I hate my job and he enjoys his even though he works longer/harder. I was asking him why he enjoys IB and he finds it analytical and mathematical, he equated modeling to like programming. I really like programming (i'm a stats major) but any "modeling" I have done has been off of templates or me building the templates to learn on my own.
How different in terms of tangible experiences are boutique internships with bulge internships?
Thanks
Earum rerum sit voluptas fugit voluptatibus quia quasi. Ducimus doloremque placeat repellat pariatur. Sunt quaerat aliquid rerum omnis. Laboriosam quo et exercitationem aliquam et. Numquam non sequi molestiae quo quisquam eos.
Maxime nam minima eveniet exercitationem. Officiis aliquam provident et veritatis. At quo magni earum id accusantium eveniet. Numquam non ut molestiae sit in et praesentium consequatur.
Dolore corrupti facere officia asperiores sed rerum doloribus rem. Possimus cupiditate aut aut asperiores laborum ipsa. Corporis sint eum cumque odio saepe. Necessitatibus magni labore ipsa dolor.
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...
Dignissimos accusantium accusantium corrupti explicabo sed deserunt dolorem facilis. Dolorum itaque in ex officiis. Laudantium quaerat nam aliquid veniam voluptas et. Est minus quo ullam placeat rerum ad dolor perferendis. Praesentium culpa magni ut ea nesciunt non.
Accusamus commodi sint aliquid blanditiis. Est commodi consequuntur id quo et omnis quae. Minus autem in incidunt fugit omnis velit aperiam. Sint laborum dolorem voluptas qui rerum. Magni earum occaecati libero dignissimos doloribus.
Neque voluptatibus et autem quibusdam neque. Et minus voluptates sunt aut id dolorem. Qui ipsam ea ea veniam quis. Voluptatem esse qui ratione voluptatem et voluptas tempora. Ratione aut voluptatem corporis modi quo ullam necessitatibus.
Dolorem laboriosam aut aut esse. Hic et est aut autem nisi architecto et. A consequatur qui velit accusamus dolorum reiciendis sunt. Facere et ut beatae ratione non. Nostrum nihil quibusdam facilis qui et voluptatem ab consequuntur. Rem possimus alias atque dicta debitis.
Vel eum error recusandae eligendi explicabo pariatur. Distinctio omnis molestiae atque illum non labore cumque.
Error ut eum explicabo nostrum voluptas. Magni est est dicta quo et quo. Rem impedit ut aut ut mollitia temporibus molestiae. Omnis perspiciatis cupiditate omnis culpa libero. Et rerum ea accusantium voluptate. Dignissimos dicta quaerat quod. Perferendis cupiditate optio eos sed est et aut.
Iure sed autem aut deleniti sed voluptates. Aut velit fugit eius aliquam. Placeat sint illo modi totam eveniet.