Choose Asset Management over IBD? Help!
CS Asset Management (strategy group) NYC vs Barcap IBD Hong Kong. Both SA positions.
I know these are two very different positions and that's why I'm having a really hard time trying to choose between the two. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks so much!!
CS:
-Better hours/lifestyle than IBD, OT pay for SA
-Great group culture. Strategy is small group.
-Exposure to different products within AM and gain more macro understanding of the business
-Concerned about exact type of work I'll be doing
-lots of networking opportunities within the AM division and also with other divisions (also it looks like HR is planning a lot of activities and events for SAs outside of work)
-might have chance to switch to other groups within AM or other divisions if I do well
Barcap
-It's in HK (cool but not entirely sure if I want to be in Asia full-time)
-In 2010 recruited many star players from other BBs, very aggressively trying to expand in Asia
-I heard HK hours are longer
-Small but growing IBD office
-Really like the MDs
Which one would provide better opportunities come full-time recruiting time? Also, I've already had previous Asia experience so if I go back to Asia would I be pidgeonholing myself there and would it hurt my chances with US offices during FT recruiting?
If you want more info on CS AM group:
The Strategy Group partners with AM businesses and sales and distribution to drive profitable growth for the AM division globally.
-Strategy is a small, entrepreneurial, high-impact team within one of the world’s leading financial institutions.
-The Strategy group is a center of excellence for the execution of critical, multi-faceted strategic initiatives on behalf of AM CEO and senior leadership.
-A member of the Strategy team receives extraordinary exposure to key decision makers in AM, senior portfolio managers, and Credit Suisse’s best-in-class external partners.
-Working in Strategy provides a great springboard before beginning to specialize in alternative investments. The top-down view of Asset Management leads to “big picture” understanding of the industry and financial markets.
-There are opportunities to work with colleagues around the globe, including travel to Zurich and other international investment hubs.
Personally, I would go to AM, but that's because I like AM much more than I like IB.
Alexpasch, what's your background?
I heard some people got to AM from IB. Is AM a better place to be at a more sr level? I'm concerned about the type of skills/work I'll be given at a jr level in AM versus IBD. Also, the strategy group isn't specialized and doesn't seem too technical. thoughts?
I graduated magna from Wharton and went straight to a MM PE shop. I resigned from that position to form my own HF.
I like putting money to work and investing. If that's what you want to do, go to AM. I think AM is better prep for HF than IB (depending on what you do in AM, of course). For PE, I think IB is better prep. Depends what you enjoy and want to do. The lifestyle is also loads better in AM vs. IB. People underestimate just how important lifestyle is until they're out working in the real world. Do what you love and you'll never work a day in your life.
Go with AM if you are putting a lot of weight on lifestyle.
but what about in terms of full-time recruiting/b-school/other exit opps?
would you rather work in AM or IBD?
If this were in NYC, I think it would be harder to choose. In this case, because you're considering both, I would go with AM. IBD in HK is no joke, and it's probably worse than in NYC. Of course, it might be a little easier since you'll have even less of a chance at a life outside of work, but that might not be a good thing.
Ultimately, it's all about where you want to end up. PE, go for IBD. HF, this AM gig sounds like the way to go.
Alexpasch, what areas in AM are best for exiting into HF?
Bump as I'm interested as well.
If you're doing markets strategy you're probably best going to something like global macro or a multi-strategy fund that has a broad mandate. If you go do research on funds you are going to end up at a FOF. If you do PWM or PB type stuff, you will probably go to marketing dept. at a hedge fund. If you do trading for the AM then you can go do execution trading at a HF.
Not everyone who goes into AM makes it to HF, obviously. Still, AM involves making investment decisions and putting money to work. These are the types of skills that are useful for HF.
In IBD you learn how to value a company. IBD is really only prep for long/short equity funds or risk (merger) arbitrage. If you want to work for these types of HF, IBD is probably better.
which one would be better when the time comes for full-time recruiting?
HELP, YOUR ADVICE! am vs. ibd?? (Originally Posted: 02/01/2010)
summer internship: Asset Management (think GS/JPM) vs. IBD (think UBS/DB) ??
How plausible is it to transfer from AM to IBD after the internship is over? Also, what are you thoughts on AM, any way? I'm not as familiar with AM, its benefits, exit opps, prestige, pay, etc. But there must be a reason why IBD is still the more popular choice, right?
(offers expiring soon) thank you so much!
IBD, hands down. UBS/DB are still BB, despite the constant thrashing of BBs that aren't GS/MS on this forum. It's not viable to go from asset management to investment banking.. not at all. AM has a better work-life balance, but I'm guessing you don't care about that shit, since you pursued an IBD gig.
If you are really interested in banking, then go with the banking position as the banks you listed are still BB banks, although UBS is on the weaker side of the spectrum (internal vs. banking-specific problems, however). If you are interested in the buy side, or asset management, then obviously go with an incredibly strong name in JPM/GS and go for the FT offer. Completing a SA position with UBS/DB will definitely make you marketable to other strong BB shops in IB and if you are set on IB, then go with the IB gig.
It really depends on you and your interests - whether you are interested in the buy side from a big bank perspective or whether you are interested in sell side transaction execution, advisory work and experience. AM is a fine career path is if it is on interest to you and in terms of prestige, it is definitely towards the better side of the spectrum. I don't know enough to speak to bonuses, but base pay is usually similar to IB and S&T.
At the end of the day, it is only a summer opp. If you think AM is for you, then go with that, if you like IB better (besides just the bonuses), then go with that. If you are uncertain but are definitely interested in IB, then I would go with IB just to see if you can handle it and like it once at the desk - it's a hell of a lot easier to deal with IB for a summer than for a 2-year commitment. If you like the SA IB position, then go for FT. If, however, you don't feel that it is for you, go for AM and just have a good reason for why you prefer AM over IB when applying. It will also be easier to go from IB to AM than the other way around, as IB is top of the BB pyramid (in terms of IB, AM, S&T, Research, etc.)
Good luck.
Thank you so much! I really appreciate your input.
I agree it depends what you want to do. If you want to do IB then choose IB, if AM then choose AM. If you're not sure then choose IB and try it for the summer. It's harder to switch from AM to IB than the other way around. Besides, IB rules.
BB IB or BB AM? (Originally Posted: 02/11/2014)
I'm an undergrad with 2 options for this summer: buyside ER at BB AM (think GSAM/JPM/MSIM), or BB IB (Bar/Citi). I'm highly interested in investing, and so I'm leaning towards the AM gig but I'm hesitant because I don't know anything about exit or promotion opps (happy if either is provided; can wait it out to be analyst/PM eventually but unsure if this place promotes everyone or they lateral/jump to HF's).
(Side note - I'm kind of scared I'll go into AM and just one day wake up and realize I don't have edge/alpha generation capabilities and hence I'd have been better off doing IB->PE and sitting back and relaxing... but heck I'll do AM coz it's what I enjoy)
If I was looking at a L/S value HF or traditional MF, would the IB or the AM give me better exit opps? What is promotion from Research Assistant to Analyst/PM like at BB's? Is it advisable to spend some time at BB AM that really trains you before jumping to a less structured HF?
Insights really appreciated!!! Will throw SB's for particularly good insights.
Unless you're at Barcap Natres or Citi M&A, the jump to a MF in any role will be incredibly tough. Would take the AM role.
I've seen HF's prefer IB peeps as well as ER peeps, so there' s no clear road to a HF. Obviously funds who cater to special sit/distressted investments will prefer to have someone who has at least some experience in that area whether from an M&A or Rx group. Other funds prefer to have ER folks b/c they're more acquainted with a sector and (supposbly) have more real-world experience with the markets.
Either role probably won't make you a better investor, but each has their own pro/con list when it comes to assiting in the move to a HF. Either role can take you there, though.
Hmm... I could trawl linkedin for info but any idea on which shops prefer IB over ER? Not in terms of strategy but in terms of name (Citadel, Soros, Dodge & Cox etc)
Edited
I've seen plenty of buy-side ER at BB go to a HF
IBD vs. AM SA? (Originally Posted: 01/03/2008)
I would like to know what the general perception is of the internship programs in the Investment Banking and Asset Management (institutional) divisions of the BBs, particularly GS, MS, JPM, Lehman, and BlackRock(for asset management only). I imagine ibanking interns would learn a great deal of modeling and have a great exposure to deal flow. Hwever, what would be some of the advantages of an internship in institutional asset management? Would these interns be able to build a comparabley solid skillset by the end of the summer? Thanks in advance.
AM would be viewed as sort of "better than something unrelated, but below PE/HF/banking experience." You can learn some good skills doing it and it's good to get the experience working at a bank, but generally it is a notch below a banking summer internship.
AM interns would have a better lifestyle and hours but they would be at a disadvantage to those who had banking/PE/HF experience when applying for FT finance jobs.
both would put you in a good position for FT job opportunities almost anywhere, but in almost all cases I would suggest doing the ibanking, as at the intern level i think there is much more to gain there
what about an equity research internship vs AM?
Aliquam ipsam et delectus sed earum eum ut. Sit at omnis quisquam debitis.
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...
Perspiciatis sit et voluptatibus. Esse est corporis vero saepe amet commodi. Vitae est assumenda omnis est labore autem. Sed dolorem corporis cum soluta voluptatibus laudantium. Deleniti quibusdam ut doloribus architecto odio non. Sed ex eum laboriosam quisquam.
Quod dolor illo alias laborum eveniet. Dolorum hic accusantium omnis expedita.
Necessitatibus dolor possimus consequatur dolores sunt labore. Omnis molestiae dolores voluptatem maiores id eius temporibus nemo. Sed consequatur ipsam quae voluptatum repudiandae dolore.