BB Leveraged Finance Groups-Which group actually does modeling (even if it is non-sponsor deals)?
I understand that at some BBs, sponsor deals are modeled in the LevFin group such as BAML/JPM. However, anyone know which BBs (such as CS, Citi, DB) have levfin groups that still do modeling for other industry groups, even if does not mean modeling sponsor deals. From what I have gathered, it seems that CS and DB still do modeling in the levfin group, just not on sponsor related deal while Citi's Levfin desk is more of an ECM/DCM kind of role where they are working on pricing and market color.
let me just say, without going into specifics, that all the information on this website regarding modeling in LevFin groups are more inaccurate than they are accurate.
my suggestion to you, straight up ask the Levfin team you are interviewing with.
Was in levfin in London for a while and never heard of any group which didn't do its own modelling. Actually, levfin modelling is usually more detailed than M&A modelling simply because you are at a stage where you have way more data than at pitching or CIM phase, and actually have to model detailed cash flow and waterfalls based on contemplated or actual debt structure. I was in banking in 2006 though... time flies!
was in levfin as well as m&a and restructuring.
all banks will tell you they model, but not all do. the ones that don't will sort of beat around the bush. goldman for example told me in my interview that "they contribute to the model and provide expertise related to debt"
many levfin groups play a very secondary role in running hte model. citi, goldman, morgan. have you ever really heard of these groups being top groups? its always ubs la, goldman tmt, jpm levfin, ubs sponsors, etc and places like that that are mentioned.
GS, MS and Citi are clear that levfin is ONLY PRICING AND NO MODEL
lol @ above idiot, ubs aint top for anything.
anyone know about CS?
As you said in your OP, CS Sponsors models deals for financial sponsor clients. CS Lev Fin also models, but for non-sponsor related deals.
do you happen to know if the exit opps into PE are good for CS Lev fin group?
Are you sure that BAML levfin models and not SPonsors M&A? What is the role of Sponsors M&A at BAML?
^ Sponsors M&A models.
bump
Would lateral movements from a nonmodeling lev fin group to IBD coverage be tought after a SA position + offer?
BAML? I've heard 10 different things, seems like nobody knows 100%
I know people from Citi levfin went to topshops ... that team is just a pricing team haha they managed to fool the funds...
what do you mean fooled the funds
CS LevFin is very solid.
anyone else know how much modeling is done at the CS LevFin group and how the exit opps are into megafund PE?
UBS is legit.
just not in america.
and they would have been a lot better if the federal government just let them tax evade clients in peace
FARTMAN RULES
2 AND A HALF MEN BOUTIQUES DON'T
bump
Leveraged Finance/Sponsors for BB's (Originally Posted: 02/02/2010)
Can anyone help me with the top financial sponsors and leveraged finance banks on the street? Is JPM known as the best or Goldman Sachs? What is the ranking?
The banks with the largest balance sheets have the best LevFin teams:
For FY2009 (last year total completed)
http://www.leveragedfinancenews.com/data/high_yield_league_tables.html
[quote=ibhopeful532]The banks with the largest balance sheets have the best LevFin teams:
For FY2009 (last year total completed)
http://www.leveragedfinancenews.com/data/high_yield_league_tables.html[…]
Wait wait wait. Can someone actually pull the real data from last year? If you look closely, the link provided does NOT provide FY2009 league tables, but instead 1/1/2009 - 1/28/2009. Year over year for January is hardly indicative of the entire year.
1styearbanker caught this but said BAML was number 1 last year. 1styearbanker, Do you have a subscription to leveraged finance news? If so, can you post last year's numbers? It'd be great to get an idea of where everyone stood last year.
Please don't make me laugh about goldman. BAML is the best, and followed by JPM. Above poster is correct with his link and post.
2009 Rankings
2010 Rankings so far as shown by link above
US High Yield
BOOKRUNNER 1/1/2010 -1/28/2010 Proceeds (US$ Mil) Rank 1/1/2009 -1/28/2009
JP Morgan 2,084.3 1 681.9 2 Bank of America Merrill Lynch 1,983.4 2 1,056.6 1 Morgan Stanley 1,651.0 3 565.3 3 Goldman Sachs & Co 1,584.6 4 232.7 7 Citi 1,113.0 5 224.3 9 Credit Suisse 1,029.2 6 424.8 5 Deutsche Bank AG 969.1 7 499.1 4 UBS 648.6 8 - - Barclays Capital 600.0 9 - - Wells Fargo & Co 581.9 10 335.6 6
The most recent data is from only january 2010 so that is why JPM is first right now. Usually BAML is first as you can see from all of 2009. Judging data from 1 month is premature so just trust me that BAML is #1 in LevFin. http://www.leveragedfinancenews.com/data/high_yield_league_tables.html
It seems that exit opportunities, especially when aiming for top PE firms, are greatly influenced by the strength and prestige of the group that you're working in. That said, if you were working at BAML (and BAML's LevFin group is the best on the street) would the levfin group give you the best exit opps when compared to other groups at BAML?
Of course I understand this is a generalization and candidates are evaluated on a individual basis.
I know UBS's LevFin group is a combination of LevFin and Sponsors. Is there any other bank that does that? What does it mean for the Analysts in terms of how they work on deals?
UBS and WF are both like that, combining the FS/LevFin. Thanks for the link ibhopeful
from what I heard is that banks that combine their FS with LF means that they don't do enough business on their own so they combine the groups together. I know that DB has a stand alone Lev Fin group because they are extremely busy. On the contrary, they are busy because majority of the Lev Fin bankers were first to be let go last year so they just might be understaffed.
@openoutcry,
Good pointout. Unless you have a TR account, you cant pull the historical data. They update that table weekly, but if you'll take my word for it, it was:
1 BAML
2 JPM
3. MS
Thought it'd be great for the board to do a little digging. Just found the Q4 report and have posted it below. So interestingly enough, the rankings for last year aren't BAML,JPM, MS. Assuming we're only considering high yield, the table is below. MS is super low, and even the year before it was only #5. How are other people calculating this?
High Yield - http://img196.imageshack.us/i/4q09debtcapitalmarketsrd.jpg/ 1) JPM 2) BAML 3) Deutsche 4) CS 5) Citi 6) GS 7) MS 8) Wells 9) Barclays 10) RBS
TR 4Q09 Debt Capital Markets Review http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/1237/4q09debtcapitalmarketsr.jpg http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/1237/4q09debtcapitalmarketsr.jpg http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/732/4q09debtcapitalmarketsri.jpg http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/9986/4q09debtcapitalmarketsrk.jpg http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/1237/4q09debtcapitalmarketsr.jpg http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/5558/4q09debtcapitalmarketsrm.jpg http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/1237/4q09debtcapitalmarketsr.jpg http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/5181/4q09debtcapitalmarketsrd.jpg http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/5181/4q09debtcapitalmarketsrd.jpg http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/1237/4q09debtcapitalmarketsr.jpg http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/1237/4q09debtcapitalmarketsr.jpg http://img508.imageshack.us/img508/1237/4q09debtcapitalmarketsr.jpg http://img704.imageshack.us/img704/1237/4q09debtcapitalmarketsr.jpg http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/1237/4q09debtcapitalmarketsr.jpg http://img683.imageshack.us/img683/1237/4q09debtcapitalmarketsr.jpg http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/1237/4q09debtcapitalmarketsr.jpg http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/1237/4q09debtcapitalmarketsr.jpg http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/1237/4q09debtcapitalmarketsr.jpg http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/1237/4q09debtcapitalmarketsr.jpg http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/1237/4q09debtcapitalmarketsr.jpg
I posted what I remember, I don't have an account anymore.
wtf, baml isn't first. Must be wrong.
you probably saw league tables from a different provider. they all vary anyways.
Openoutcry's list seems right, I'm surprised UBS is not replacing RBS though. Probably due to their FS office being disintegrated?
So Sponsors is the best group within these bulge brackets for PE? Why does everyone say M&A because I talked to my alumni at my target school and they all say sponsors and leveraged finance is much better than M&A for getting into PE.
depends on which bank. my old BB's industry/M&A groups did all the modeling/bank presentations and LevFin did execution only
my old BB and ML were on a $20bn LBO. i was the industry analyst for my bank and my analyst counterpart at ML was from ML levfin. while i was the one responsible for the model, it was levfin who was responsible for the model at ML.
If you get extensive LBO modeling experience, then I believe Sponsors/LevFin would be the best group for PE. M&A is an old favorite due to modeling experience, and is more general.
Why is there such a huge difference between outcry's list and banker/high yield's list?
he's showing rankings as reflected by 2010 YTD, so the past 30 days or so. I was looking at all of 2009.
Before all the uneducated unemployed idiots like moneykingdom come in here, let me add some value that isn't full of shit.
There are many different kinds of PE, some groups like TMT will place into tech oriented PE, some into healthcare oriented PE, and whatnot. If a coverage group does its own modeling, like GS, you'll even have GS TMT going into KKR/BX and other megafunds (GS TMT consistently sends the most to KKR, there is no comparison).
From a general approach, FSLF with good experience will be just as good if not better than M&A, but analysts from both groups depend heavily on deal flow and their experiences. Most importantly it depends on the bank. Some banks like MS M&A will obviously place better than MS LF, but BAML LevFin will place better than BAML M&A.
If you had to rank groups, which makes no sense since it depends on the bank and that bank's reputation, go for LevFin and M&A first. Then go for strong groups that your bank is known for. Then finally, go for DCM due to some modeling experience and if you have absolutely 0 choice left you will get stuck with ECM in which case you should reneg on the offer and go to a boutique.
Edit: I liked how the retard put in energy as #4. You're a joke.
Dear 1styearbanker (this is a joke in itself, but i digress...)
First of all, I am not unemployed, nor uneducated. In fact, I am formally educated at Cornell, and a former banker here in NY. Second, I work in PE, an area that you most likely will never get to interview in.
Second, DCM does almost NO modeling. Almost none. They provide market updates, and comps for the most part. I can describe this further if anyone would like...ECM is a joke, and should not be considered banking.
Third, Yes, different banks have different strong industry groups, however, some industry groups do not do a lot of inhouse modeling. This is why my rankings up at the top did not include every group, moron.
Fourth, you mentioned MS M&A... I worked there, and yes this is about the only point that you are correct on. Very good placement.
Finally, Energy is definetely number 4 because it is the most difficult industry to learn. Have you ever read a 10-k for an energy company? I worked in the M&A group and we COULD NOT even help them with their models, simply because we did not understand the industry, reserve reports, cash flow drivers, etc. EVERY ANALYST in my class who went to energy got great placement post-analyst stint. Even those in a 'regional' office. Please think before posting, first year banker.
Are you flame? Who the fuck cares about ecm/dcm, that's not my main issue with your post. You also fail to spell "definitely" correctly. I'm glad you worked in MS M&A but can speak for all energy bankers in that it is "the most difficult industry to learn".
Your ranking is shit and so are you. It's impossible to say M&A > LevFin which is what my whole issue with your post is. Learn to spell and maybe your post will have credibility.
I know you're a retard monkey so I will summarize my post for you below.
Summary: It's impossible to say whether M&A or LevFin is better for PE. It depends on the bank, the group's reputation, the experience the analyst gets, and dealflow. This is in stark contradiction to your post "No. M&A is the most desirable group for placement...by far." You are wrong. I am right.
Hope you are not retarded enough to understand this a second time. I would also love to see some of these links for your year's energy placement class. Care to share? Please link me to a megafund, I would really love to see what these energy guys are up to.
Sure, PM me and I will send you a screenshot of their placement, moron. Just off of the top of my head, I remember one analyst going to TPG, one analyst going to TriStone, one going to Apollo. I'll find the placement presentation. I love when people attempt to downplay the quality of a post based on its spelling. That is like judging an athlete by the color of his shoes, anyways... You, by your own account, are a FIRST YEAR BANKER. Again, you have not gone through recruiting, nor have you been 'placed', so think before you make assertions.
Here is a summary for you... M&A at most BB's is the most desirable group. LevFin USED to be just as desirable in the 2004-2007 days... just stating facts. Sure, any BB LevFin or Sponsors group will trump a middle market M&A group, but we are comparing apples to apples. Oh, also, these are generalizations... sure GS TMT probably places better than most M&A groups, but that is what we call EXCEPTIONS. Will a real banker please back me up?
My only quarrel with you is that you are so biased you refuse to understand that "exceptions" are huge. No one gives a shit about mid market either so stop bringing up random b.s. into this. Maybe you have a huge bias coming from MS but at banks like Citi and BAML, M&A is not definitively the best "by far" as you have stated. It is quite even and BAML LevFin is top on the street and gives much better exit ops on average than most other groups.
Also, it's hard to use search function of WSO on my phone but I found this this www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/my-thoughts-on-one-year-in-banking stating that you left banking in 1 year and you're at a small pe. Sorry you work at a no name PE fund and couldn't cut it in banking broseph. I take shits larger than your pe firm. If you stayed longer than 1 year and didn't constantly bitch about your job maybe you would have gained more insight and maturity in banking. And yes I will need those links because I scoured the profiles of those funds and no one with an energy background showed up.
Peace out, my dinner break's over.
Hahaha...
Wow, you must take some large shits. This is why I love this forum. It is people like yourself, that entertain others, and for that, I thank you. Yeah, to be quite frank, MS M&A was awful. I was soo happy to be out of there. Oh just so you know, my bonus at my "little" fund, will be paid the first week of March and I guarantee you it will be more than your total comp. Hey if you enjoy banking so much, keep trucking at Robert Baird.
Interesting comments, 1styearBanker and MonkeyKingdom. Since it depends on the bank, what do you think about the groups at DB? 1) M&A 2) LevFin 3) Sponsors (separate from LevFin) ?
DB has historically had a pretty good LevFin team, but will the work in LevFin be very DCM-like, with market updates, comps, high yield trends etc? Between LevFin and Sponsors, where will I get good LBO modeling experience but still work on bank presentations?
Thanks
DB lev fin team doesn''t do DCM like work. Nor do most lev fin teams across the street unless they are awful. If you are going to DB and want better PE ops then lev fin will get you more exposure than M&A. Not saying this applies across all banks.
I still haven't gotten those links, what happened?
DB is weak for banking, but their best group is probably LevFin. Look at the rankings for proof. But it's like I said, it depends on dealflow and experience. No one is a psychic, you could have a horrible year in levfin or in M&A. No one foresaw how badly M&A got hit these past two years and it depends on the individual when looking at exit ops.
I mean look at mr. knowitall here, he's at a small no-name PE fund coming out from MS M&A. I'm sure even middle market kids do better than him. Why would you believe his M&A banter when he can't even land a MM pe fund coming from MS M&A. Sad I know.
My whole point is that it is impossible to judge because both M&A and LevFin are so modeling intensive and is exactly what PE firms look for. Sponsors/LevFin sometimes has an advantage from what I've seen because of the nature of the work and being the first line of contact for PE firms (financial sponsors). For many banks with reputable levfin (JPM, BAML), the FSLF group's analysts are the first choice for PE firms when they come recruiting.
So many kids don't even know what a financial sponsor is. Go wiki or dictionary it and you'll understand why that plus intensive modeling makes getting PE quite easy.
Here you go bro (posted on a different thread)
http://www.silverlake.com/employee.php?page=team&id=120 http://www.silverlake.com/partners/employee.php?page=team-partners&id=50 http://www.silverlake.com/partners/employee.php?page=team-partners&id=47 http://www.silverlake.com/employee.php?page=team&id=122
Those links aren't from last year's class, but for this year class, I heard GS Nat Res is sending a kid to Apollo and one to H&F.
on a sidenote, firstyearbanker, what's it like working at BoA as a transgendered individual?
Haha owned
can one of you please answer this question for me, does BAML have separate LevFin and sponsors groups, or are they just one group combined?
Tothedeath are you fucking retarded? Those are all Goldman Sachs and all the links are to one PE firm. I can find GS anything at any fucking megafund, including FIG and energy which pidgeonholes anywhere else. Monkey and I even discussed this since GS TMT and other groups DO THEIR OWN MODELING+M&A+LevFin+EVERYTHING ELSE so Goldman Sachs is the obvious exception.
Goldman Sachs FIG is in megafunds too, does this mean FIG is also #1? How about Healthcare? They're in megafunds too from Goldman Sachs. I guess Healthcare group is also #1. Oh wow let's all link 4 Ex-Goldman Sachs employees at the same fucking silverlake firm. Let's base EVERYTHING in investment banking off Goldman Fucking Sachs. According to Goldman Sachs, all groups are #1 since every group has an analyst in a megafund. That makes a lot of fucking sense doesn't it thank you for clearing that up.
You must be retarded.
Oh I get it now, you didn't read the thread at all you simply wanted to plug in how great Goldman Sachs is. Well dont' worry we all know it is the bees knees.
//www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/GS-accelerated-interview
Another retarded college kid who knows nothing. You're also not very smart, you've pretty much outed yourself as a GS SF fulltime analyst in the sponsors group. Not many of those this year.
hey 1styear, do you know if BAML has separate sponsors and LevFin groups? do you know what the major differences in work between these two groups are, assuming they are two separate groups and not one consolidated group? Thanks.
They're two separate groups.
They're separate groups, that's all I'm going to say. Some aholes tried to out me by asking me questions through PM so I won't be responding to specific group inquiries anymore. The difference has already been discussed, run a search.
Here's a site http://gmi.ml.com/invest_bank/
Haha, 1styearbanker is on a roll!
To answer your question about why I couldn't land a big name fund such as KKR, Apollo, CVG, Warburg, Carlyle, etc, is for two reasons: a) I was leaving my analyst program early, and b) I was tired of working 90+hours a week. For your information, if you go to a mega-fund you are likely to work just as much as an IB analyst, the exact reason I got out of banking... Does this make sense to you, you know the whole 'cause and effect' thing. Probably not, but I'll move on... Plus I work about 65 hours a week. You really can't beat that.
Good luck on your exit opps from Robert Baird or PiperJ, or RayJay, or whatever boutique you work at.
Does every thread have to become a flamewar? It was such a helpful thread too until halfway through.
does anyone know if LevFin is part of DCM at any of the BBs? Thanks
Thanks for the opinions related to DB. Despite the length of this thread, I'm not clear what the difference between LevFin and Sponsors is, relating to the type of work. I understand Sponsors is more involved with client (PE firm) interaction, so presumably they do more of the presentations, such as working on a detailed company profile for a company they are recommending the PE firm to acquire.
So then, what type of work do LevFin bankers do? Will LevFin do more of the LBO modeling once a PE firm has expressed interest in a target? What will LevFin do besides working on the model for a PE LBO?
How does the work differ between LevFin and Sponsors?
Thanks
1styearbanker, can you comment on CS M&A versus FS?
Yes, the LevFin (now called Non-Investment Grade) group at WF is part of DCM
1styearbanker is a turd
dude stop wasting your time
Not true. Sponsors and LevFin are not part of DCM at WF and they are under the special group. DCM is its own group.
See: https://www.wellsfargo.com/downloads/pdf/careers/College_job_descriptio…
Also the two groups recruit seperately. DCM works with LevFin but is not LevFin.
I never said the Sponsors group was part of DCM. However, the Loan Syndications and High Yield Capital Markets Group is also called DCM and is an umbrella group that includes Mid-cap Sponsors and Non-Investment Grade loans which used to be LevFin back in Wachovia days.
nervous_nelly is correct.
Correct but since the merger FS have done a lot of the LevFin. It is not accurate to simply say DCM = LevFin because like you said, DCM is an umbrella group. The two even have different groups and floors.
https://www.wellsfargo.com/downloads/pdf/careers/College_job_descriptio…
Financial Sponsors: Originates LevFin, M&A, and equity transactions. DCM: Too long to type.
Right, DCM does not equal LevFin; the Non-Investment Grade Debt Group WITHIN DCM does. It's kind of complicated. FS as a group is more relationship building/management. As stated, it originates LevFin (like any coverage group) but the DCM product group is responsible for actual execution.
I agree it's very complicated but Sponsors is not the traditional coverage, they do a lot of modeling and have very good exit ops on the street. One of the guys who exited at a top 50 PE by size according to wiki was from Sponsors and did a lot of modeling as well.
I apologize for my ignorance, but in a PE deal, what's the point in the PE firm and IB LevFin group both making lbo models? Whose model is eventually used?
Both models are used... you show different cases (base case/sponsor case and etc...)
They don't both do models. It depends on the bank, but typically financial sponsor groups are used to execute the debt financing for sponsors, whereas lev fin does leveraged loans and high yield bonds for corporates and acquisitions
Bump, does anybody know for BAML specifically? Is the LevFin group more of a modeling intensive, LBO, acquisition financing role or does it take more of a capital markets role?
I just explained this in a different thread.
http://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/group-selection-1#comment-410014
save
Lev Fin - Differences among BB's (Originally Posted: 02/14/2011)
I've been having a tough time assessing how Lev Fin varies (with regard to types and amounts of modeling done, how closely they work with Sponsors Groups, etc.) across the different bulge brackets.
Although I've spoken with Lev Fin groups at a number of banks, it's not always easy to get an objective answer. I don't know that an anonymous online forum will necessarily be the bastion of objectivity and levelheadedness that I'm looking for, but it definitely gives me another (hopefully useful) data point.
I think I'm pretty familiar with the dynamics at JPM, MS, GS, DB, and UBS. I'd love to get any insights regarding BarCap, CS, Citi, and any other firms on which people can opine.
I really appreciate it.
Please share your knowledge about the dynamics of JPM, MS, GS, DB and UBS.
yes, share what you know with the rest of the board. don't just leech.
and give me SBs for answering your question in previous post. haha
I heard CS pretty much has a combined LevFin/Sponsors group, and that they are #1 on the street in that arena.
CS Lev Fin and Sponsors are separate groups, with Sponsors being #1 on the street. Lev Fin is also a solid group at CS, but not on par with the likes of JPM and BAML.
CS has a Sponsors group and a separate Lev Fin group. However, the Sponsors group is basically a Lev Fin group and does all the LevFin product work for Sponsor clients (e.g., LBOs and refinancings for Sponsor portfolio companies). The separate Lev Fin group does sub-investment grade financing and restructuring work for corporate clients (i.e., not Sponsors and not Sponsor portfolio companies). So in the Sponsors group at CS you will be doing LBO financing for KKR/BX/etc. In the CS Lev Fin group you will be doing high yield financings for companies that aren't owned by sponsors but have a lot of debt.
+1 on Pivot's note, would like to hear your insights into the banks you know about...
I've heard C's LevFin group is more of a terms/pricing function, with a lot of the modelling done in industry groups. Could be wrong.
I'm interested in hearing your thoughts on JPM, MS, GS, DB and UBS as well.
LevFin:
Don't know about JPM. Obviously strong group but don't know about modelling per se.
MS = within GCM = terms/pricing/comps. Ind. groups do 'heavy lifting'.
GS = within Financing = same style as MS.
DB --> strong.
UBS --> FSLF is technically two separate groups now but at jr. level you are cross-staffed and has very good placement into megafunds and other top PE.
For someone who wants to do IBD FT, would a SA internship at a firm like MS or GS lev fin be a bad thing? thinking primarily about PE exit ops from full time.
.
How about GS/MS SPonsors?
How about DB sponsors?
How about Citi SPonsors?
I know a guy in Citi LevFin he said they don't do any modelling... and I know a few guys from Citi Levfin who managed to get into BX...
I guess because it is so vague and unclear people just lie about their modelling experiences and their team and the brandname / team it self will give you interview so you can do the actual modeling at home?
It seems like no one on this website really knows if BAML, JPM, MS, and DB lev fin model or not, jeez.
Any BB except UBS can get u into a megafund if u got connects and luck.
however, the best LevFin teams are the ones that model, Citi and CS are not one of them.
JPM is king.
Based on what I know--admittedly not a lot--DB, BAML, and JPM do substantial modeling.
More info on BAML anyone? Does LevFin or Sponsors do most of the modeling? I've heard its largely based on the MD who brings in the deal.
is it the same for JPM (as they also have separated FSG and LF) ?
Answer this
Citi lev fin does not do any modeling, all done out of their sponsors group (called financial entrepreneurs) or industry group. They do more pricing/terms/conditions/market color etc. stuff
I confirm the situation at Citi. It is just pricing. I confirm the same for GS and MS LevFin. GS/MS don't have sponsors group in London so I guess their modelling is done in industry groups.
Please answers this for JPM and ML levfin and sposnors anyone?
Seperately isn;'t it funny, we established lots of differences among teams so even if you are in a pricing comps levfin team such as GS/MS/CIti you can lie to Megafunds about your modelling skills as nobody knows anyways....
modeling is just accounting (situation specific accounting based on the type of transaction) in excel. when you interview at PE firms they will ask you accounting questions and they will ask you IRR questions or ask you to do hypothetical, simple LBOs on a piece of paper or in your head. then they will give you a case study or modeling test in which you will have to build an lbo model from scratch. if you don't know accounting well and don't have experience with models, it will show.
you are already going to write on your resume that you did all sorts of models for every transaction type, regardless of whether you really did or not. that's not going to get you the job unless you're at a market top and the competition for PE associates is really tight (like it was in 2007). there will always be a few kids who slip through and get jobs without knowing how to model really well, but they are exceptions.
How are you going to lie to megafunds in your interview? You either know how to model or you don't.
These days learn how to do modelling is even easier with BIWS packages... WSP packages etc..
Now please don't divert from the original question...
How is LevFin & Sponsors split at JPM and BAML? Anyone?
Bump?
Voluptatum fuga ut ut soluta reiciendis velit. Est magni maiores qui necessitatibus vel ullam qui. Eligendi est doloribus vitae dignissimos velit ut. Tempora vel quas et cumque fuga dolorem quas sit. Quo nobis ut adipisci eligendi repellendus consequuntur nemo. Omnis laborum necessitatibus explicabo impedit ullam quia voluptates. Vitae perspiciatis temporibus eius et cumque animi.
Atque asperiores nemo esse non voluptatum sed perferendis. Dolorem sed voluptatum natus soluta voluptates repellendus.
Nam eaque aut omnis dolores enim. Perspiciatis occaecati veritatis iusto. Velit suscipit ut repellendus est quaerat. Quibusdam voluptatum sapiente soluta quaerat aut blanditiis sit. Sed inventore mollitia dolor consequuntur in.
Eligendi officia aliquam animi iste. Corporis cupiditate optio dolores incidunt voluptatum error mollitia. Est iusto consequatur dolorem repellat.
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...
Tempora explicabo mollitia ut harum aut cumque. Facere nam id officia et recusandae et dolorem. Molestiae et dolorem recusandae temporibus et. Optio perspiciatis sed et nihil.
Culpa et magni consequatur et. Perspiciatis amet enim modi facere beatae veniam ut. Facere maxime in est ut quidem.
Voluptatem quaerat dolor voluptate quibusdam quia perspiciatis. Earum quis voluptas qui omnis unde consequatur impedit.
Non possimus corrupti excepturi. Voluptatum aut impedit aut. Dolore ipsam dolorum non consequatur doloribus nisi modi eius. Doloremque eum modi et non. Unde eum beatae error similique.
Atque dolor omnis est nemo molestiae a esse. Eos et sequi dolorem odit expedita dolore ex. Eius nihil nulla ut excepturi delectus dolorem facere. Vel dolor dolorem et rerum.
Similique qui a omnis accusamus et et amet at. Architecto nihil qui voluptatum ab et corrupti.
Quo qui dolor magni excepturi. Et porro nihil et similique qui. Voluptatem eaque corrupti et temporibus iure veniam est fugiat. Voluptates soluta quos cum quidem.
Aut quidem sequi autem consequatur recusandae explicabo optio. Quos tempora excepturi minus voluptas aut. Aperiam est quaerat suscipit culpa ipsum ipsam dignissimos. Voluptate est officia provident iure voluptas ipsum. Minima ipsum cum similique dolores aut.
Provident praesentium odit eos. Sequi voluptas praesentium iure qui similique qui voluptate veniam. Enim quasi voluptas ad. Est fugiat voluptate autem laborum optio et eligendi.
Cupiditate et fugit minima. Et voluptatibus quasi et eaque veniam unde. Aut beatae harum provident voluptatem voluptatem. Accusamus molestias optio ratione delectus.
Dignissimos delectus sint itaque voluptatem fugit. Dolorem occaecati non distinctio quas ut. Omnis iure id tempore cupiditate non. Minus eos ut rerum rem.
Praesentium animi non dolore neque est enim nobis. Qui enim sed quod. Omnis commodi vero blanditiis iure. A consequuntur doloremque eum voluptatibus dicta vel. Odio magni nam beatae quia omnis expedita. Nisi hic magnam laborum hic.
Tenetur rem autem velit quaerat quia quae. Molestias quis sed voluptatem ut consequuntur nisi. Et qui hic quibusdam inventore expedita voluptas. Nisi illo ut iste tempora nulla.