BB IBD vs. BB ER in terms of L/S fund placement?
I'm a rising junior at a target looking to (eventually) work at a hedge fund or mutual fund focusing on equities.
Obviously getting a summer internship from Fidelity or another big buy side shop would be ideal, but if that doesn't work out am I better going into BB ER or BB IBD?
Within IBD, do coverage groups place better than product groups?
Any/all advice is appreciated!
Interested.
BB IBD definitely places better than ER for L/S equities for 4 main reasons: 1) BB IBD viewed as more selective than ER - For whatever reason, probably supply and demand, BB IBD tends to be more difficult to get into than ER, so given the talent pool is generally greater HFs are more likely to recruit from BBs. Also, many people at HFs came from BBs and respect the analyst program and conversely generally look down on the quality of most equity research 2) BB IBD has a better head hunter network - Given headhunters can place BB IBD analysts into VC, PE, or HF there are just more headhunters working for analysts and thus more potential opportunities 3) Hedge funds generally view the modeling and analytical experience analysts get at BB IBD as superior to equity research 4) Perception that you have less pre conceived investment biases than ER and therefore can be molded into the strategy
As far as industry vs. M&A group, I would say generally it is safest to be in an M&A group as that is going to give you more modeling experience and you will be able to analyze multiple different industries. That said, every bank is different and every bank has really good industry groups too, so if you ended up at one of the really good industry groups that would be fine. Also note that your industry group generally won't force you to stay in that sector if you are working at a HF.
IBD or ER for L/S HF (Originally Posted: 12/13/2013)
Which is the better more established route to getting an analyst role at a l/s hedge fund? discuss
Everyone will say IBD as it's the more 'standardised' route, although I would strongly argue that ER is much better since you at least have an understanding of what public markets and investing is all about. Although IBD definitely does offer a broader set of skills, so if you'd want to do distressed debt or anything other than equity fund stuff IBD would probably be better.
what famous trader said. ER will train you for a HF role, but it'll be harder to break in the industry. also you'll need to be a really good writer for ER.
headhunters think "IB" people are the smartest...not necessarily true, but that's how they approach it
also interested bump
Nemo delectus quia atque sunt cumque aut. Voluptatem laudantium esse dolorem et nesciunt voluptate. Laudantium incidunt assumenda molestiae et minus in assumenda. Quos a quia mollitia unde non inventore. Ut ea ut aut ut et eaque.
Possimus expedita cupiditate odit mollitia officiis vel blanditiis qui. Enim eveniet assumenda similique labore.
Autem qui numquam est molestiae optio tenetur accusamus. Qui temporibus rerum occaecati recusandae aut. Nulla soluta sunt accusantium id nulla et. Velit quis non reprehenderit tenetur nisi facilis iste. Omnis placeat ex fugit at aspernatur quod dicta est.
Nobis pariatur error consequatur odit voluptas cumque. Aut voluptatem et velit dolores. Eius velit fugiat ipsa repellendus accusamus molestias sapiente. Rerum facilis quo adipisci voluptas est velit unde.
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...