• Sharebar

thoughts?

The WSO Advantage - Equity Research

Financial Modeling Training

IB Templates, M&A, LBO, Valuation. Learn More.

Wall St. Interview Secrets Revealed

30,000+ sold & REAL questions. Learn More.

Resume Help from ER Pros

Land More Interviews. Learn More.

Find Your Mentor

Realistic ER Mock Interviews. Learn More.

Comments (31)

  • In reply to KarateBoy
    Dank Nugs's picture

    KarateBoy:
    http://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/for-er-how-m...
    Disagree completely. While the best analysts aren't necessarily at BBs, a junior person/associate is far better off at a big name firm. You're guaranteed to be paid at least on par with people of equivalent experience and you'll have better resources, better access to mgmt, etc. When dealing with exit ops or a career change, you'll get the benefit of the doubt of your firm's brand. It's much more common to see an analyst who was an associate at a BB vs a boutique/MM because that person's resume carries more weight. Not right, just the way it is.

    I work at a boutique and I'm starting to see some of the differences (notably pay, resources, sales support). While I really like my analyst, I'd probably push harder for a BB if I could do it again. It's hard to say which firm is best but from what I've seen/heard, Barclays (ex Lehman), MS, and BofaML have stellar reputations.

  • dacasale's picture

    As said above, it is rather an "individual" game. However, ER rankings do tell which houses have a good number of recognized individuals, corporate access, execution, etc. -which is always good to know if you are starting-. The main rankings is Reuter's Extel Awards (http://www.extelsurveys.com).

    They don't do US, but here is Europe, Asia and Japan for 2010. They also rank individual analysts per sector, and to avoid the subjectivity of "quality research", they do so in terms of commissions generated.

    EUROPE:
    1 1 UBS
    2 2 Bank of America Securities - Merrill Lynch
    3 3 Credit Suisse Securities
    4 6 Morgan Stanley
    5 4 J.P. Morgan Cazenove
    6 7 Deutsche Bank
    7 5 Citi
    8 9 Exane BNP Paribas
    9 8 Societe Generale
    10 10 CA Cheuvreux
    11 13 HSBC
    12 11 Goldman Sachs
    13 18 Nomura Securities
    14 14 Sanford C. Bernstein
    15 23 Barclays Capital
    16 16 RBS Global Banking & Markets
    17 19 Kepler Capital Markets
    18 15 Natixis
    19 21 Redburn Partners
    20 17 Oddo Securities
    21 20 ING Financial Markets
    22 (-) Evolution Securities
    23 (-) UniCredit
    24 22 Commerzbank Corporates & Markets
    25 (-) Macquarie Equities

    ASIA:
    1 4 Credit Suisse Securities
    2 2 CLSA Asia-Pacific Markets
    3 1 J.P. Morgan
    4 3 UBS Asia
    5 5 Citi Investment Research
    6 9 Deutsche Bank
    7 8 Nomura
    8 6 Banc of America Securities - Merrill Lynch
    9 11 Macquarie
    10 7 Goldman Sachs Asia
    11 10 Morgan Stanley
    12 13 BNP Paribas Securities
    13 (-) CIMB Securities (Singapore)
    14 18 RBS Asia Securities
    15 17 DBS Vickers Securities
    16 14 Kotak Securities
    17 (-) Daewoo Securities
    18 (-) Motilal Oswal Securities
    19 21 Daiwa Securities Group
    20 (-) Ho Chi Minh City Securities Corporation (HSC)
    21 12 China International Capital Corporation (CICC)
    22 16 HSBC
    23 (-) BOCI
    24 (-) JM Financial ASK Securities
    25 (-) Standard Chartered Bank

    JAPAN:
    1 6 Mitsubishi UFJ Securities
    2 14 Barclays Capital
    3 2 UBS Securities Japan
    4 1 Merrill Lynch Japan Securities
    5 21 Tokai Tokyo Research Center
    6 10 Mizuho Securities
    7 7 Morgan Stanley Japan Securities
    8 5 Goldman Sachs (Japan)
    9 3 Nomura Securities
    10 13 Citigroup
    11 11 Calyon Securities (Japan) (CLSA)
    12 12 Deutsche Securities Ltd. (Japan)
    13 15 Macquarie Equities (Tristone)
    14 8 J.P. Morgan Securities Asia Private
    15 9 Credit Suisse Securities (Japan)
    16 19 Ichiyoshi Securities
    17 4 Daiwa Securities Group
    18 17 Okasan Securities

  • In reply to Dank Nugs
    KarateBoy's picture

    I too work in a boutique/middle-market bank like you and I understand where you are coming from. I accepted my offer last January while it seemed none of the BBs were hiring when I was looking. It's a little frustrating to see my younger classmates with comparable resumes being offered job are Goldman Sachs, Barclay's, and JP Morgan while I had to REALLY bust my ass to get one non-BB offer.

    Neither of us can know this for sure but this may be an example of non-BB juniors fantasizing of "greener pastures"

    Half of the individuals I work with came from BB banks (either as associates with experiences or analyst that were invited with the promise of a big pay) and many of them feel that our boutique does a better job because

    1) We care more about our companies and the research we produce
    2) Typically have a longer term view
    3) Typically have better relationship with management due to longer relations and, on a relative basis, high turnover that the big banks
    4) Less of a slave to the I-Bankers
    5) We cover less companies so the quality per note is higher

    So I find it more than a little interesting to hear non-BBers complain about lack of access to resources while former-BBers rave about the higher quality of work done.

    I do believe that a non-BB analyst can give you more attention than a BB analyst, especially if he is traveling 3-4 days a week chasing banking deals. Then it becomes a question of what is more valuable, a prestigious brand or being on an accelerated learning curve. I wish I had the answer to that one.

    So, on a personal note. I wish I spoke with the buyside more often and had access to the top funds. HOWEVER, even if I did it would be unlikely that I would call them or that it would be worth while for them to speak to speak with me, especially if my analyst had not spent HOURS per week teaching me. I say this with confidence because I doubt junior guy (regardless of the bank he works with) knows more about about any given company and how the company's stock trades than any buysider who is considering purchasing the stock.

    Dank Nugs:
    KarateBoy:
    http://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/for-er-how-m...
    Disagree completely. While the best analysts aren't necessarily at BBs, a junior person/associate is far better off at a big name firm. You're guaranteed to be paid at least on par with people of equivalent experience and you'll have better resources, better access to mgmt, etc. When dealing with exit ops or a career change, you'll get the benefit of the doubt of your firm's brand. It's much more common to see an analyst who was an associate at a BB vs a boutique/MM because that person's resume carries more weight. Not right, just the way it is.

    I work at a boutique and I'm starting to see some of the differences (notably pay, resources, sales support). While I really like my analyst, I'd probably push harder for a BB if I could do it again. It's hard to say which firm is best but from what I've seen/heard, Barclays (ex Lehman), MS, and BofaML have stellar reputations.

    Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/_KarateBoy_

  • bunkerbanker's picture

    I like Bernstein research. Stifel is pretty good at times. All BBs research suck. Most boutiques are terrible too(e.g. D.A. Davidson or some sht)

  • In reply to bunkerbanker
    Ray Finkle's picture

    bunkerbanker:
    I like Bernstein research. Stifel is pretty good at times. All BBs research suck. Most boutiques are terrible too(e.g. D.A. Davidson or some sht)

    Yeah all BBs suck. Barclay's product is the best, mostly b/c of the Lehman inheritance but still. Also every boutique does not suck, Argus and Janney both have great analysts in certain spaces. D.A is not a bad product also, I highly doubt you work on the buyside so this is probably a waste.

  • In reply to bunkerbanker
    bunkerbanker's picture

    Janney is not bad I agree.

    I mean in general, boutiques aren't much better.. like a Longbow or Suntrust. Obviously there are a few that are good (Blair and Gleacher come to mind)

  • KarateBoy's picture

    Baird has at least a few good analysts too. I'm familiar with their transportation and industrial guy.

    Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/_KarateBoy_

The WSO Advantage - Equity Research

Financial Modeling Training

IB Templates, M&A, LBO, Valuation. Learn More.

Wall St. Interview Secrets Revealed

30,000+ sold & REAL questions. Learn More.

Resume Help from ER Pros

Land More Interviews. Learn More.

Find Your Mentor

Realistic ER Mock Interviews. Learn More.

  • indebt's picture

    Even if "Baird" or "Gleacher" are great, wouldn't it make more sense to work for Goldman -even if their research is shit- in order to keep your exit opportunities more open?

  • KarateBoy's picture

    Why would a HF want to hire someone who writes poor research? How will you add value to the firm?

    IMO, hiring people with the words "Goldman" on their CV doesn't generate as much alpha as hiring people who know their stuff.

    Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/_KarateBoy_

  • jdog112's picture

    Good posts, I learned a lot. Can someone clarify sell-side/buy-side to a newbie? One side promotes/sells and the other advises on investments? that about right?

  • Walkerr's picture

    Interesting posts. I was wondering whether ER was "easier" to get in to than IB? What sort of people are they looking for?

  • UKtop's picture

    BBs are the best place for equity research, at least until you are a star analyst... then it doesn't matter where you work.

    At the beggining, BBs have a established training structure. Many BBs put their graduates in full classroom training from July (when the programme starts) to December (when they make them take CFA1), and this is something that boutiques cannot afford to match.

    From then on, resources are always superior at BBs. Corporate access, specialized sales people, execution... Salaries are higher too.

  • Wannabedude's picture

    Walkerr, thats a tough question to answer. I think it ends up being just as hard as
    1) IBD's pedigree of candidates are higher
    2) ER needs less grunts, so grad opportunities are often less. The value of your major is also lessened as ER tend to appreciate varied backgrounds alot more ie if you were a straight business major and you came up against a kid with a resource engineer + finance background.. (assuming the group was related to commodities etc)

  • Walkerr's picture

    Thanks for the response Wannabe. My goal is to be a portfolio manager some day, hedge fund or mutual fund. Do a lot of people make the switch to HF or MF? I guess it depends on how good you are, which is defined by how well you score with your analysis?

  • roar19's picture

    Is that really true about how prime brokers of the companies get their results the night before?

    I always just thought the associates damn near killed themselves to get the note out so quickly.

    Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules.

  • In reply to Walkerr
    What-to-do-What-to-do's picture

    You can always start in buyside research, which is obviously the biggest pipeline to the portfolio management track, at least at mutual funds/traditional AMs.

    Walkerr:
    Thanks for the response Wannabe. My goal is to be a portfolio manager some day, hedge fund or mutual fund. Do a lot of people make the switch to HF or MF? I guess it depends on how good you are, which is defined by how well you score with your analysis?
  • In reply to roar19
    KarateBoy's picture

    I never heard of this. Sounds like unfair/unequal dissemination of material information.

    roar19:
    Is that really true about how prime brokers of the companies get their results the night before?

    I always just thought the associates damn near killed themselves to get the note out so quickly.

    Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/_KarateBoy_

  • Steve Mallory's picture

    Agreed. Doesn't happen.

  • In reply to KarateBoy
    gamenumbers's picture

    KarateBoy:
    I never heard of this. Sounds like unfair/unequal dissemination of material information.

    roar19:
    Is that really true about how prime brokers of the companies get their results the night before?

    I always just thought the associates damn near killed themselves to get the note out so quickly.

    This absolutely DOES happen. Certain companies do this every single quarter, although they are definitely in the minority. I work at a BB. It is called 'embargo' data, and occasionally a firm will release results to a select group the evening prior to the press release. Each Analyst has to agree to the terms of the embargo - which strictly forbids any discussion of results until they are offered to the general public. The senior IR person or CFO will then (usually) personally call each Analyst who received the embargo data to chat - the IR guy is trying to determine what kinds of questions the Analysts will ask on the earnings call in order to better prepare the CEO. I cover 15 companies and one of my companies does this. The company is a small-cap conglomerate that owns a wide range of businesses.

    Usually the Associate works like crazy to update the model and publish a First Read, usually within 30-45 minutes of the numbers hitting the wire. This gives you roughly 2-3 minutes to print, 5 minutes to scan / read the PR, 10 minutes to update your model (better hope nothing crazy happened during the quarter!), 10 minutes to write the note, and 5-10 minutes to push it out the door through the publishing / compliance / editing process. And if anything goes wrong, you are going to be screwed during the Earnings Conference Call, which typically begins ~30-60 minutes following the issuance of the press release. IMO it is the most intense part of the job, especially if a major company has lots of obscure one-time events, which always become tricky with the model.

    By rule, BB is definitely better than boutiques when you are just starting out. I fully agree with Dank Nugs (hilarious name btw). Pay will be better. Resources will be deeper. If an II ranked Analyst is working at a small shop, he likely has a huge pay package that keeps him there.

    BB banks will have an equity sales department, which acts as a megaphone for your Analysts' "calls". When my Analyst says "Buy X", he has a huge sales force echoing his call to every PM on the Street. When a small cap Analyst says "Buy X", he has to rely on his own rolodex. The trading floor at my BB will generate significant trades from the "Buy X" call, and thus my Analyst gets his huge bonus at the end of the year.

    The sales dept will also put the Associates in front of all the big hedge funds literally all day long. When the sales dept recommends the "Buy GM" call to the buyside Analyst, the buyside Analyst or PM will often want to speak directly to the sell side Analyst who made the "Buy GM" call. Often the Analyst is too busy, so the work falls on the Associate's plate.

    All things being equal, working for an II ranked Analyst is better than not. And all things being equal, working for a BB vs. a boutique in ER is definitely better IMO.

    I cover two sectors. The #1 guy for the first sector is at a BB. The #1 guy for the second sector is at a boutique (it's a much smaller sector).

  • In reply to lifesgreatmystery
    jdog112's picture

    lifesgreatmystery:
    on the buy-side you wanna work for asset management firms and not BB's! above street pay, great hours, better training, huge networks into HF's other investment management firms as you are already on the buy-side

    What are the best buy-sides in Mid-Atlantic and New England area. Firms like MFS?

  • In reply to jdog112
    Ray Finkle's picture

    To unlock this content for free, please login / register below.

    Connecting helps us build a vibrant community. We'll never share your info without your permission. Sign up with email or if you are already a member, login here Bonus: Also get 6 free financial modeling lessons for free ($200+ value) when you register!