Analyst vs Associate

1. What is typically the distinction between an Analyst and an Associate? Is it years of experience, a change in responsibility, or both? How many years? What responsibilities?
2. How does compensation general work along the Analyst to Associate path?
3. Does firm size matter?
4. How does your firm communicate the path from Analyst to Associate? Do you have written guidelines? If so how is it set out?
5. Do Associates get hired who didn’t take a normal path from an analyst? What experience/Degree(s)/Majors/GPA is required to be hired in at the Associate level?

What is an Analyst vs Associate?

Typically speaking, analyst positions are entry-level in the firm, typically for post-undergraduate while associate positions are the next tier up, requiring an MBA and have more responsibilities overall. However, it is noted that at consulting firms, associate positions are usually promoted analysts based on job-experience but both analyst and associate require college degrees.

The role of each position can vary between start-ups to corporate. Smaller firms have analysts perform a variety of tasks that take more responsibility but do not have an associate as their supervisor.

On average, it takes 2-3 years to become promoted to an associate position, but you do not need to have any previous analyst position requirements to be hired for an associate role. Once you become an associate, responsibilities and leadership roles fall on you as you become accountable for analysts' performance in the firm.

How much are Analysts and Associates Paid?

Compensation for both analysts and associates vary from firm to firm and on how long each associate has been at the firm. Below are a snapshot of industry compensations. If you would like to learn more about a specific industry click on each specific industry!

For Investing banking:

Investment Banking Industry Report

For Private Equity:

Private Equity Industry Report

For Hedge Funds:

Hedge Fund Industry Report

For Consulting:

Consulting Industry Report

If you have any more comments regarding the differences between associate and analyst positions please comment below!

 
bostonbanker1:
1. What is typically the distinction between an Analyst and an Associate? Is it years of experience, a change in responsibility, or both? How many years? What responsibilities? 2. How does compensation general work along the Analyst to Associate path? 3. Does firm size matter? 4. How does your firm communicate the path from Analyst to Associate? Do you have written guidelines? If so how is it set out? 5. Do Associates get hired who didn’t take a normal path from an analyst? What experience/Degree(s)/Majors/GPA is required to be hired in at the Associate level?
  1. Analysts, whether you like it or not, have to listen to and do what their associates say. The difference is one of authority, title, responsibility. In a standard firm, its 3 years as an analyst (2 if you're really good). The main difference in responsibility is that its the associate's fault when you, the analyst, fuck up.
  2. Compensation is higher at associate than at analyst. Look up the statistics on the compensation survey.
  3. At smaller firms analysts tend to get more responsibility and may not have an associate above them on all projects. This is also true for experienced analysts at most firms (really good 2nd or mediocre 3rd years).
  4. It's pretty standard across the board, 2 years with an option for a 3rd as analyst at the banks discretion. If you are really good (I won't define what good is, but suffice it to say that "good" analysts get associate offers) then you get an associate offer. It's then 3.5-4 years as an associate till VP. The big difference is that associate is more of a career choice than a career building choice.
  5. A very large portion of associates were never analysts and just went to business school and had some previous experience doing something stupid. An MBA is basically the required degree.

Let me say also that I despise MBA associates for the first year or two because they tend to be completely useless, however they think the degree taught them something. I would take a 1st year analyst over and out of b-school associate for a project any day of the week.

Disclaimer: I am an associate and I don't treat my analysts that well.

--There are stupid questions, so think first.
 

Thanks PM - great explanation.

What about someone who obtained a Bachelors and Masters at the same time (say in 4-5 years) in the same major (say economics). Non-Ivy League school. Does that carry the same weight as undergrad and grad degrees obtained consecutively or with a year or two as an analyst in between?

It seems to me it wouldn't carry the same weight assuming a bunch of courses counted towards both so its a watered down version of two independent degrees. Has anyone done this or run into people who have?

Also - I've heard this about MBA. Curious though - why aren't Masters' in Finance or Econ acceptable?

 

A joint masters obtained in 4-5 years carries little to no weight. For someone who had good internship experience etc and has this in addition they may, in a good job market, be able to start as a second year or something of the sort, but in this market you are a first year just like anyone else. This isn't to say that it might not help non PE/HF exit opps or give you some sort of personal benefit.

I know a number of people who have non-mba masters taken immediately after college (or jointly) and none of them got a boost out of them. There is a connotation to these degrees that you just couldn't get a job out of college if it wasn't a joint program. If it was a joint program, well its a nice thing on your resume, but I would rather see good internships in banking etc.

As a point of reference, broadly speaking little to nothing learned in a program like this would be useful as a banker. Yes having seen a BS/IS/CF is a good thing, but you'll learn everything you need to be an analyst in your firms training program or within a few weeks of people pounding the information into your head 90 hours a week.

As to an MBA vs other degrees, an MBA is a Masters of Business Administration. Now, depending on the university it can mean a number of things, some have you do a bunch of case studies, some focus on class work, some are entrepreneurially focused, others corporate. All of them though provide one thing of value, a network of like minded individuals in your class and in an alumni network. This network and the training to network on your own are the important aspects of business school. In other parts of the world a Masters of Finance is viewed in exactly the same light and actually provides a much more useful technical background and focused experience that is truly good for banking. In the US, these programs are not as common and thus not as well received.

If you want to break into banking after working for a few years, get an MBA from a top school, don't bother with another degree in the US. In general, banks won't even interview non-MBA masters candidates for associate roles unless they have a lot of relevant experience.

Further Disclaimer: I've never known anyone who was an MBA associate without prior banking experience that I respected in their first 2 years on the job. I also haven't found any of the non-MBA masters kiddies to be any better, smarter, or more capable than their college grad compatriots.

--There are stupid questions, so think first.
 

For the first 6-12 months, all our MBA associates get 1st year analyst work. Everyone knows they're as or more useless than a 1st year analyst for a long while. The difference is the company is making a bigger commitment to them, because as PM said, the associate track is more of a career path than a 2-years-and-done style of analyst programs.

 

Just go ahead and start as an associate, best way to go about it.

When a plumber from Hoboken tells you he has a good feeling about a reverse iron condor spread on the Japanese Yen, you really have no choice. If you don’t do it to him, somebody else surely will. -Eddie B.
 

Wow the formatting is weird.

[quote]The HBS guys have MAD SWAGGER. They frequently wear their class jackets to boston bars, strutting and acting like they own the joint. They just ooze success, confidence, swagger, basically attributes of alpha males.[/quote]
 
datdere:

lol beta. you think you can just walk in with a big swinging dikk and be a ceo 10k/day?

Everytime I see a Misc reference on WSO, I feel so much less worried about not having someone that shares my interests when I start work this summer. Strong post/10, would SB again.

 

Jesus you guys have no balls to go after the real stuff. Why start at the bottom? Why start in the middle (MD)? Why not just start as a Pre-IPO senior partner at Goldman while your at it. Leave all of that work for the plebs who will start at the bottom.

Follow the shit your fellow monkeys say @shitWSOsays Life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid - John Wayne
 
babarzk:
datdere:

lol beta. you think you can just walk in with a big swinging dikk and be a ceo 10k/day?

Everytime I see a Misc reference on WSO, I feel so much less worried about not having someone that shares my interests when I start work this summer. Strong post/10, would SB again.

In on SBT thread

 

Associtaes with non ib backgrounds are hired because they usually have client experience (may have been consultants or some similar bs) and they are simply too old to be analysts. You will see analysts who humbly follow what the associate says although we all know the guy is a retard and the work will have to be redone when seen fromn the eyes of a vp or director. While it might be true that analysts who get promoted should have nothing to grip about remember this: this guy's time will be juicd holding the hand of the new associate all inthe interest of teamwork...this will have been the case for his as an analysta and a newly minted associate...and yes this would apply to US/EU

 

I've worked in a group where associates are just glorified spell/grammar check. Generally, I found that the associate doesn't get as good as the analyst in modelling quickly - but the associate slowly figures out how the MD / VP want presentations/books etc to flow. It just gets annoying as a second / third year when the associate makes you do useless work that you know never will end up in the final product.

Summer Associates are the worst as they continually try to impress the seniors. I've seen them give legitimate analysts busy work (comps) so many times.

 

My experience with associates w/o banking background is as long as they are humble (know that they probably will serve more like analysts for the first 6 months), then analysts and associates will get along ok, despite a little bump here and there.

however the reality is those associates act as if they knew it all, and that's when the clash occurs. good thing is bad rep spreads quickly about those think-they=are-badass associates.

 
sharp_in1008:
Hi guys, I have been reading the forum for some time and read some comments from analysts on their experience with associate and their hard feelings towards those without an ibanking background (MBA -> Associate). Seemed scary. As an MBA trying to get into ibanking, i would like to know of the gripes the analysts have (in order that i don't commit them if i do get an opportunity in an associate position). Could you kindly share the same. (Please do mention whether your experience is relevant to US/Europe.)

There are two types of associates, but before saying anything, there are different bank environments.

Bank environments: 1. As a newly minted MBA the bank will make you work like an analyst for ~6 months or so. You don't have an analyst working for you, you're trying to figure out the models, WP/DTP, who does what, etc... After 6-months, you're allowed to become a "real" associate and you now have subordinates. I think this is best model. 2. At the MM or smaller IBs, they allow the associates to start commanding analysts immediately. If you have prior IB experience, you're probably fine. But if not, you are probably running around like a chicken w/o its head. Now this is where it breaks down (see break down)...

Break down: 1. If you're a smart guy, don't waste time and allow your analyst to operate (if they're somewhat competent), you will be fine be as an associate. You might drag the analyst down at times b/c you need to learn about a model or book and if you're taking their time up, be gracious and understanding. The analyst will be the same way if they need to learn something from you. 2. Sometimes the associate thinks they're superior to the analyst even though they have no experience. They hit the ground running, command everything, don't allow the 2nd/3rd year analyst to operate and the process becomes grueling. Sometimes the associate will learn and he'll be fine... other times, they get pushed to the wayside by analysts and life become more difficult.

ON A SIDE NOTE, I have an associate like number 2 above. Nice guy, but working with him is difficult. He doesn't understand LBO concepts, doesn't allow input and generally thinks he's in control (it's great to see him get schooled by a VP!). B/c of his inflexiblity, the analysts give him sub-par work, don't put much thought into what they're doing and view working with him as chore, not an opportunity. B/c of my attitude, I might whack 5K off my bonus, but at least I can shave time off with him, and devote it towards those who can benefit (beware - I'm a 3rd year who's bitter). haha

As a newly minted associate, you need to view those under you as an asset and let them produce. t

 

Interesting to see the comment on summer associates assigning "legitimate analysts" (by this I guess he meant FTers not summer interns) work. I've never heard of that happening in our place, they'd be told to fuck off pretty quickly if they tried.

Also where I work new MBA associates would never be in charge of 3rd yr analysts and rarely in charge of 2nd years in the start at least. Guess it varies from bank to bank.

 

Analyst: disposable grunt. Literally worked to death and then tossed out, except for the best ones.

Associate: on management track. No guarantees, but it's assumed that's the goal in most places.

Get busy living
 
UFOinsider:
Analyst: disposable grunt. Literally worked to death and then tossed out, except for the best ones.

Associate: on management track. No guarantees, but it's assumed that's the goal in most places.

LMFAO, Associates are pretty disposable too dude.

'We're bigger than U.S. Steel"
 

In seriousness, analysts do the grunty heavy work like data entry and formatting, the associates clean it up and serve as the channel so that the vp's don't have to correct the analysts work or even instruct them on what to do - just instructing analysts on all the work to do and managing it and making sure it is all correct is a big job, and that's what the associates are for.

In sum: MD - talks to new clients and sets up pitches VP - frames the book sections and writes important strategy sections saying what the MD wants Associate - gets told by the VP what other things need to go into the book, then tells that to the analyst and then spellchecks and proofs everything (if they are doing their job right) Analyst - puts the things into the book

There's also a big difference in the career goals of each - an analyst might just be wanting to do a year or two and jump to a PE/hedge fund, b-school, or straight to associate, whereas an associate has what I consider one of the tougher options, because to get promoted to officer level is probably one of the tougher promotions to get and the exit options are more limited for IB associates.

I've always viewed the term Associate as just slightly less degrading than Analyst. You go from being someone who just analyzes things to being someone whom the firm doesn't actually mind saying is associated with the firm.

if you like it then you shoulda put a banana on it
 

The biggest problem usually comes when you have an experienced analyst working with a brand new associate. While nominally the associate is the analyst's superior, there's a huge experience gap between someone who's been in banking for 2 months vs someone who's been in banking for 1-2 years, which naturally creates tension. It gets exacerbated when the new associate thinks he's all that, and tries to influence the analyst away from what he already knows works. Not always the case that the analyst isn't wrong, but there's nothing wrong with being open minded about different ways to do things on your first deal.

 

In many ways, Associates have the hardest job in banking.

For one, they manage the analyst working under them on the deal / pitch. Note, however, that it isn't so much a boss - worker bee situation as it is a partnership of sorts. Yes, the Analyst will do the brunt of the analysis / PPT work. That said, the Associate will often dive deep into the actual work product and will often run with the higher level strategic aspects of a pitch book (i.e. strategic rationale, SWAT analysis type stuff.)

Additionally, the Associate is absolutely responsible for checking over a work product, even if the Analyst is great and has given it a run-through. If there are mistakes in the book, the blame will fall hardest on the Associate.

What makes the Associate role so tough is that it involves managing down and managing up. Meaning, managing expectations with VPs and MDs (not as simple as it sounds since it requires a good deal of backbone.) And you'll never be able to manage up as an Associate if your superiors don't respect your work ethic and insight.

Associates, at least ones that I've worked with, also generally were expected to have the most in-depth knowledge about a client / prospect / industry during a pitch. If any random questions come up, the Associate is expected to handle them.

Obviously this sort of thing varies from bank to bank and Associate to Associate, but this ought to give you a decent idea as to what the Associate role is like vs. the Analyst role.

 

spending the day watching star wars on spike... then out drinking

not that i have a job on the street but i figure i'd chime in with my college activities

looking for that pick-me-up to power through an all-nighter?
 
[Comment removed by mod team]
 
barboon:
I wish I worked in a cublicle cranking out spread sheets... call me crazy but its the truth.
Believe me when I tell you - you don't know what you're wishing for. It's not as glamorous as you think.
- Capt K - "Prestige is like a powerful magnet that warps even your beliefs about what you enjoy. If you want to make ambitious people waste their time on errands, bait the hook with prestige." - Paul Graham
 

There's a specific process involved in IB transactions that will be second nature to a good 2nd- or 3rd-year analyst...whilst the newly-minted MBA may have no clue what's going on (assuming he or she hasn't worked in IB before).

That said, once the proverbial learning curve is conquered (after, let's say, 6 months), I think an MBA can bring a lot to the table (which is why, even though I'm a 3rd-year and could probably get promoted next year, I still want to go to b-school). If nothing else, it brings added perspective and likely a more holistic way of thinking about the business world.

And finally, as a pre-emptive reaction to the statement above, if you are convinced you want to be a rockstar banker forever, you probably don't need the extra degree. Nowadays, the opportunity cost of going back to school (from a lucrative banking job) could be just shy of $1 million.

 

tire you pretty described the experience someone else on this board had...he got promoted to associate but it was a lot harder on him, then he went to get his MBA and when he came back it all came much easier to him

 

He got promoted from analyst??

My point (and LB's, from what I can tell) is that initially, a 3rd year analyst will certainly be ahead of an associate who had no previous experience in IB....for a while. And maybe forever if the analyst is a star (assuming he/she gets directly promoted).

But if you're talking about someone who took an associate position without having done IB before, then your comment makes total sense.

 

since most of you here are analysts - there is an obvious bias. since i am about to join as an associate - it takes some experience to manage the whole deal process... not saying that somebody who did a bunch of stuff during ug cannot do it. but not the regular ug out there.

 

i think you'd be an idot to turn down an associate spot to take an analyst role. they are essentially the same job when you're new to banking and you are. you are going to be learning the ropes so why not get paid more to do so? its not like you are a direct analyst to associate promote where you will be able to take on more right off the bat

 

First, keep in mind you are only 3.5 years out of college. If you had been in banking from the start you would've only just now been promoted to an associate this summer. I know any number of people with one and two year masters degrees that aren't MBAs who were all hired on as first year analysts. They didn't have experience before the degree though. You have two years of unrelated experience, an MPA and some internships. They might hire you on as an experienced analyst, say a second year.

Remember, banks don't count much if it isn't directly related to banking. There are plenty of people out there with 10 years of experience and an MBA who are just now becoming first year associates.

Basically, the only way you get hired on as an associate is to fulfill the one of following: 1. Over two years (usually three) of experience in investment banking, private equity or hedge funds 2. MBA 3. PHD in a Quant area 4. JD + experience in corporate/M&A law

You don't meet any of these, so analyst.

--There are stupid questions, so think first.
 

'Analyst' in a markets or banking sense tends to denote your level of seniority, but that's not the case in all sectors. I can't intelligently speak to public finance in particular, but there is a chance that 'analyst' for them is the role, and does not represent your seniority.

I would say you should be an associate, especially if you're interviewing for positions in public finance (in which you already have a graduate degree). Still, it could be a by-product of the times that the bank thinks they can bring you in as an analyst.

I'd take the interview and talk with the boss about it. If you advocate well, and show that you're not a total neophyte, you should be able to argue for an associate position. I mean--there are loads of associates who come out of b-school knowing precisely fuck all about markets that start as associates (I guess) because they're older than true newbies.

An aside: my boss generally doesn't like to hire b-school kids because they're less willing to get lunch/tea/coffee, and think they're owed something because they went to H/W/S.

 

Bump. First, thanks Power and brother for your responses. In my prep for that first interview I forgot to thank you for the input.

An update for anyone interested. I have now interviewed with three BBs and I've been considered for different roles at each of them. One only considered me a 1st year analyst, another wanted to bring me in as a 2nd/3rd year analyst, and one is considering me for associate. Most interesting part is that the bank interviewing me for the most senior role is the biggest name (top 4).

Just goes to show how different banks value experience differently and there really isn't a set procedure across the industry.

 
MasterBlaster01:
just FYI off topic:

if you do S&T for 1-2 years, can you switch into IBD as an associate or possibly a 2nd/3rd year analyst? Or will you still be starting out as a 1st year analyst?

Yes, you would start out as a 1st year analyst. What skill set do you bring in from S&T in those 1-2 years that could possibly help you surpass your IBD analyst years and go straight to associate? Trading spreads? Booking trades? Nada.

 

1.5 years of experience isn't really enough for an MBA. I would just suggest network since you have work experience. You could look into a 1 year MS degree, but in your case I don't know if it would be worth the time and money.

 

i doubt you'll have any chances at a BB. as the previous poster said, youd be competing with ppl with alot more work experience and MBAs from targets. look for positions at MM banks and call ahead explaining your situation at every company to see whether they would place you in the summer analyst or associate group.

 
fox2237:
A little background:

I am a first year MBA student at a semi-target. I graduated from undergrad in 2009 and worked for one year. During that one year I worked at a tech start-up and also ran a small business that I started immediately after undergrad (generated enough pay for bills, apartment). Entrepreneurship showed promise, but not enough to continue.

A few questions

  1. Should I be looking for positions as a summer analyst or summer associate?
  2. How many analysts already have an MBA?
  3. If you begin as an analyst with an MBA, do you start with more seniority and work towards a direct promote to associate? How are analysts with MBAs dealt with?

wow our backgrounds are pretty similar. although I'm an '08 grad & plan to apply to Bschool next year and hope to get into IB/VC as well.

More than likely you will come in as an Associate, whereas with some other masters programs you would probably be an analyst. Best of luck to you! If you dont mind sharing, what type of business did you run? also was the start-up VC funded? You can message me if you like.

 

Are you saying that it is technically impossible to get hired as an analyst after getting your MBA or is that just the general route?

" A recession is when other people lose their job, a depression is when you lose your job. "
 
  1. Associate positions

  2. No, analysts do not have MBAs - once you earn an MBA you are now targeting associate roles. Additionally, if you applied for an analyst position with an MBA, everyone would want to know what is wrong with you and why you are going for analyst positions when you should be pushing for associate positions.

  3. Analysts do not have MBAs. Again, associates are the ones with MBAs. Analysts go to B school to become associates if they don't move on to another bank, another division, buyside, or get directly promoted. Additionally, many former bankers who attend B school are not going to B school to get into banking, and many associates out of B school do not have previous IB experience. Between BBs, MMs and boutiques, there are many opportunities for MBAs - cast a wide net and seek associate positions.

 

Hi,

I have had the same concern, and still do actually. I have four years of work experience, three of which in corporate law with magic circle law firm. I am hoping to get into consulting after I complete MSc course at LSE. I also wondered if I should apply for associate or analyst position. I am not sure about McKinsey, sorry, but I did contact Roland Berger, BCG and AT Kearney. Both ATK and RB said that they decide the level for which applicant is suitable on the basis of applicant's CV and overall application process. At BCG, they have somewhat different application process. Associate is a graduate entry position and is equal to analyst position at other companies. Graduate entry applicant is anyone who has undertaken or has completed formal education within two years of their application date. Hence, I'd apply for associate pursuing MSc course at the time of application, and you would apply for junior consultant position-next up in the hierarchy. BCG HR person said to me that they absolutely take into account previous work experience in whatever background and those with work experience, coming in from university, although they enter at graduate level, usually progress much faster then graduate entries with no previous work experience. I hope this helps as it might be an indication of things at McKinsey. And of course, I contacted these guys in London. I don't know if they have different practice in other countries/cities. Good luck.

 

Associate - if you are in a top 10 MBA program then all of your peers will be applying for Associate internships and FT opportunities. You will be disadvantaged by your lack of experience but can overcome it by preparing for the interviews and networking. I've heard of banks offering 2nd year analyst positions to guys in your shoes but they also offer associate jobs to kids that went straight from undergrand to b-school (yes it happens. Typically with athletes). Dont settle for an analyst role.

 

Perhaps this is semantic but what "top 10" (whatever top 10 means...i would say programs ranked 8-15ish are basically the same) program is a semi-target? I'm at a program in that range and every bank recruits on campus.

They will only consider you as an associate and I'd echo the sentiment above regarding your career services office. Your best bet is to try for a spot with one of the banks who return with full-time spots in the fall.

Your story serves as a prime example of the dangers of going to business school with limited experience.

 

Associate...like everyone else you are graduating with.

Regards

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant, it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan
 
Downtown:
They are basically the same. Associate training may have an extra lesson on "how to manage analysts" or something like that but the accounting and finance content is very similar.

If you were previously an analyst, associate training is literally a vacation.

Thanks. I was never an analyst, but as I try to make a lateral post-MBA move into middle market M&A I'm getting dinged b/c I don't have the bulge bracket IB experience. One that I really like has told me that they like me, but don't know if they can wait for me to "come up the curve." They have analyst training but not associate training, so I was thinking about volunteering to go to their analyst training since I was guessing that the two are probably similar. Sounds like you are confirming my hypothesis.

 

Given your work experience (and most likely age) coupled with an advanced degree (even though it's not the typical MBA), I think you can go for associate positions. That said, if through your networking you are getting pushback that you really need to the MBA to make be competitive for associate positions, then just adjust your application strategy and move to applying for analyst positions.

I think you can start your application process with associate positions, and then adjust accordingly if necessary - remember, just as you might not get calls for associate positions if you are underqualified, so too will you not get calls for analyst positions if you are too old and too qualified.

 

If you apply for an associate position, would they ever offer to "relegate" you to analyst hiring? Again, personally I'm fine starting at the bottom. I made a 180 to finance just last summer when I worked inhouse at a firm. Always liked investing but never considered it as a career until I was physically there.

 

A girl I went to b-school was straight out of undergrad. She somehow landed a summer job at ML and in turn a job at BofA. She couldn't hack it and quit after a few months. People there expected her to perform at a certain level and since it was her first job ever, she was just overwhelemed.

Think she is now in some back office or cap markets position at Lazard now after taking a 9 month turn at corp finance at a small business.

 
Best Response

1 is the only one that is remotely possible. With very few exceptions, investment banks hire analysts almost exclusively from college. Your next entry point to IB is after an MBA.

Also, analysts in IB who want to become associates can be promoted directly with relative ease. No need to get an MBA. And pre-MBA IB experience is not at all necessary to get into IB as an associate.

What makes being an IB analyst desirable is that you can skip the MBA and/or go to a PE fund or hedge fund, which is rather difficult for an IB associate.

 

Nobis minima eos blanditiis suscipit quia molestiae. Repellendus quisquam provident placeat minima aut doloribus recusandae. Repellat numquam at asperiores totam odit reprehenderit porro tempore.

 

Similique maxime aut ut excepturi nihil repellat. Quaerat expedita voluptatem et recusandae autem. Reiciendis qui quia illum ipsa dignissimos architecto.

Voluptatum ea sint corporis voluptate. Voluptatem aspernatur amet accusamus officia placeat culpa. Dolor reiciendis et doloremque quisquam natus harum. Vitae dolor quo aut quam aut. Assumenda animi quod quas quisquam unde voluptas ratione.

 

Rem laudantium voluptas molestiae et et natus. Odio sint harum quisquam quis.

Fugit nemo magni molestiae. Id totam quibusdam error corporis. Molestiae et nemo qui culpa molestiae dicta quia. Maxime eum ut qui aut cum dolore soluta doloribus.

Aliquam et perspiciatis dolore asperiores sed. Nihil nobis sit consequatur possimus non ratione. Ratione provident atque minus hic sapiente.

 

Odio provident et quia quas. Neque quasi non voluptate non porro ut animi. Architecto iure dicta exercitationem dolores iusto.

Et vero et velit et tempora. Corrupti aut fugit nihil laudantium voluptate et et itaque. Aut quia sit numquam quas qui et.

Officiis ducimus vitae doloremque quisquam occaecati. Ab est fugit quam. Omnis tempore ipsa nihil placeat reprehenderit provident voluptatem. Perspiciatis voluptatem laborum officia molestiae pariatur. Totam quaerat ut voluptate quod ad ratione.

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (202) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (144) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
6
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
bolo up's picture
bolo up
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”