Citi vs BAML for IBD Summer Analyst
Which one is more reputable/stronger and which one would have better exit opps to PE?
Thanks.
Trending Content
| +172 | The "Not So Obvious" things that get you a return offer? | 20 | 9h | |
| +105 | Is my life over after not getting GS? | 26 | 1h | |
| +68 | Best IB group on the Street | 30 | 34m | |
| +56 | BIG FOUR ARE PARADISE | 15 | 10h | |
| +49 | Thoughts and tips on how to speak like an investment banker. | 25 | 11h | |
| +48 | Tell me one good reason why Jefferies isn’t going to be a top bank in the next 5 years | 23 | 3h | |
| +36 | UBS Outlook | 28 | 1d | |
| +34 | How to deal with egotistical team? | 6 | 3d | |
| +33 | Highest Paid Bankers in Toronto? | 51 | 9h | |
| +26 | Got RBC offer but I have cold feet accepting. | 33 | 1d |
Career Resources
at this point, Citi. I have friends who are working at BAML and they said the management really sucks.
Seriously another one of these?
Also interested in this. Specifically, between their Latin America Groups.
Citi, no question. Great people, higher on league tables, better PE exits (especially in groups like M&A and natres).
This kid probably works at BAML.
I know I know. I was wrong. BAML analysts have lots of exits too...UBS, GS risk, MBA (think Purdue).
Haha I hope not if he's coming from Harvard. And were you referring to overall or with regards to LatAm. Found this article: http://www.gfmag.com/tools/best-banks/11097-worlds-best-investment-bank…
Has Citi as the Best in LatAm
This kid probably works at Citi
troll
Difference between bank reputation / strength / exit opps is negligible - you should be more concerned about getting into the right group and then landing a FT offer.
Thus, I would sign with the bank you have more contacts at.
Also, you may realize as an analyst that PE isn't what you want to do. Keep your options open.
C.
Here is the updated version of the article you posted: http://www.gfmag.com/tools/best-banks/11616-worlds-best-investment-bank…
Citi is still tops in Argentina and some specific areas, BAML is tops in equity in LatAm, but based on last years rankings I would guess Citi is still better in IBD
Go by group strength and the people you like best. "Management" concerns are pointless at the analyst level and between these two it's like betting on the special olympics (though the Brian "the leprechaun" moynihan did get a nice nod from the Oracle yesterday)
These links are pointless. Piper as the best healthcare bank when last year it was JP? C'mon.
Go with the bank where groups are strong and people are awesome. No point in analyzing rankings too much. Data can be easily manipulated
Start recruiting (networking) for another job since day one
Someone in big 4 audit bashing Citi IBD? What's next, community college graduates bashing Yale because it's finance recruiting isn't up to par with Harvard?
Citi/BAML Tech SF (Originally Posted: 04/27/2015)
Hey guys,
Long time lurker, finally decided to sign up. Was wondering if anyone could comment on the recent deal flow of the Citi and BAML Tech coverage teams in SF and also analyst exit opps from both groups into growth equity shops.
Would appreciate any information!
bump
BAML's tech group is in Palo Alto. Are you asking about that group? Have you looked at the league tables? That would be a good start.
BAML vs Citi (Originally Posted: 11/09/2009)
Rates S&T at BAML versus S&T rotation at Citi (potentially landing FX)
Strictly on a name, sustainability, job security, exit opportunity, prestige-basis.
Many thanks.
I'm in IBD at one of them so I don't know S&T but my unbiased opinion would be to go for Citi S&T. Exit ops is all the same, not many in S&T anyways.
Citi
Arguably the worst choices you'd have to make, really.
That said, Citi are top 5 in S&T (flow trading), but how sure are you of landing a spot there (more importantly, what makes you think that's what you'd truly want to do?)?
If I were you, I'd pick Citi simply because of the rotation which would invariably offer exposure that could be pivotal at the start of a career. That said, it's pretty much a case of choosing the lesser of two evils, rather than really making a choice...
Thanks for the input, though I wouldn't really say worst choices. There aren't that many BBs left in the first place; BA-ML is doing pretty well in it's FI S&T operation, and the money its losing has little do with that its trading or banking operations (rather, mortgage losses, etc.) The only banks I would put above it are MS, JPM, GS - though definitely open to differing opinions.
The point is what do you exactly define as a BB? HSBC, Barcap, RBS (even in the good times of 2007), BNP Paribas were not widely considered "BBs" by traditional conventions (and, needless to say, BB has a bias towards American banks when you consider how Bear Stearns could be regarded as a BB, but not some of those firms mentioned).
Fact of the matter is, I don't think it matters all that much whether a firm is BB (some are living on past glories anyway). While you're right to say that the money these banks (ie. Citi/BofA) are losing may not be coming from IBanking/Trading, try convincing those on the Street that there's little difference being at BofA/Citi and GS/JPM (the difference would be more pronounced at the more senior levels).
The knock-on effect is definitely going to be carried over - you can't be paying record bonuses if you haven't repaid TARP and are forced to sell your most profittable businesses/entities at bargain prices. If you could choose between being Dimon/Blankfein and Pandit/Lewis, who would you rather be?
Let's stop arguing about these petty things. There's no need for prestige whoring in S&T. Either get on a good desk and be a good trader or GTFO. Focus more on stability, a BB is a BB (meaning large deals and corporations, not "prestige).
Where did you choose finally?
Went with BAML.
what was the baml interveiw like?
BAML and Citi - Sinking ships? (Originally Posted: 03/14/2011)
Just wanted to get the board's impressions on this topic. How big of a risk would it be to join BAML or Citi right now? This is in terms of being laid off or just loss of reputation when it comes to exit opportunities.
BAML - Only major bank still in the red for 2010 - Countrywide was a POS acquisition, especially with weak housing market - Largest market is still in the US, is that good?
Citi - Arguably greatest amount of support from the US government - Restructuring their business but exposure to securitized products still high
How do the commercial banks and consumer finance arms of each of these banks affect the prospects of the investment bank? For BAML, how much of Merrill is just used to offset Countrywide losses?
Personally, I think Citi is a better bet than BAML. Better international business model, less US exposure. I just don't know how this translates to the analyst experience.
0 risk...
and get off your damn phone. this is the library
I'd still make my decision based on the individual group and not worry too much about the larger entity. The investment banking practice at BAML (so, the ML) was very profitable in 2010 and will remain so. Worst case (or best case), BofA spins them off. I would only hesitate about joining a group that was legacy BofA.
If I am picking larger entity though, I think BAML is better off...Citi was shitty before the crisis even began.
You are joking right? Citi was an IB powerhouse before the crisis hit.
As for OP question, both banks are very good banks and are perfectly fine. Citi and BAML are probably the top banks right after GS/MS/JPM. Take a look at league tables if you don't believe me.
Here's a recent discussion for you:
//www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/gamble-on-recovery-baml-vs-UBS-vs-Citi
This thread would make sense if it was Q1 2009.
2nd in M&A is a sinking ship? I feel bad for the other 7 BB's.
Neither are sinking or in "complete shambles" or "total jokes"
what the fuck
do you guys watch MSNBC re-runs?
both are balance-sheet banks anyway--they may not be as prestigious in advisory as Goldman or a Lazard-type pure play but they get plenty of fucking dealflow
Citi just advised Berkshire on one of the biggest M&A deals of the year. They are doing fine.
Vikram? Is that you?
Citi didn't advise Berkshire, it advised Lubrizol. No one advises Buffett except Munger lol.
you're right my bad I'm just used to seeing Citi always on the buy-side
I agree with Cartwright and would say it really depends on the specific group.
Each group within each bank has a lot of variables that would affect its "risk profile": seniority of group heads within the firm (MD tenure), budget (realized vs. expectations), guarantees that may be in place within the group, broader industry dynamics for the coverage group (for example, Real Estate is riskier than FIG at most banks), type of product that the group depends on (equity vs debt vs M&A), typical deal size for that group, current deal flow etc.
Thanks for the comments. I guess it's not a big deal, especially at the lower levels. Also, wanted to share this link with you guys. Biggest recipients of federal aid:
1) Citi 2) BofA 3) MS
http://m.cnbc.com//id/42099554
Great firms, phenomenal people, and still winning solid mandates.
Citi baml ms all 3 have severe issues
Goldman advised Berkshire on something. sorry can't remember where. either in a letter or 10k. it wasn't on some stupid small matter either
also in asia at the moment Citi and BAML are still aggressive along with everyone else. perhaps except barcap
.
Minima inventore harum ea eum eos veritatis non fugiat. Dolores autem sint recusandae quibusdam dolor corporis non. Ipsam neque sunt itaque quos et. Aut quia magni amet consequatur ut dolorem aut. Ratione impedit occaecati vero sapiente.
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...
Porro sit in nemo fugit est sint. Adipisci assumenda possimus deleniti aut reprehenderit animi. Autem necessitatibus iure culpa neque quod. Quam id perferendis facilis quia nesciunt.
Id quibusdam dignissimos quam mollitia sit. Quis labore quia nihil quia alias aperiam.
Magni ipsum numquam enim praesentium dolorem quaerat tempora quasi. Nihil et magnam dignissimos minus sunt hic. Dolor voluptates officia in vitae dolores. Dicta odit sint voluptatem omnis perspiciatis. Vel non asperiores sunt nisi eaque.
Voluptatem quae sunt sit voluptate. Fuga quos eum sapiente itaque iusto dolores. Sit sint vel adipisci corrupti.
Nostrum velit quod omnis quia reiciendis. Soluta doloribus sint ut ut ut. Deserunt accusantium sequi eveniet dolores ut nam quia.
Ratione iusto id voluptas quibusdam repudiandae. Inventore et aspernatur ut nesciunt. Quia quo nostrum sint quam. Qui ab corporis sed vel qui.