Hedge Fund Intern: A 'monkey' could be a junior banker at a place like Goldman Sachs

A monkey, they say? Kid must be a fan of @WallStreetOasis.com"

From Business Insider:

Sharp young Wall Streeters are increasingly finding ways to avoid doing time at investment banks.

They're trying to build careers on the buy-side, or hedge funds and private equity firms, instead.

Whether they're student-investment club leaders or just really young and keen, many young financiers are looking to dodge the two-year analyst gigs that have traditionally been a rite of passage on the Street.

Business Insider spoke to some of these young people and learned why banks like Goldman Sachs have become a "backup plan" for them.

"A monkey could do the job" of a junior banker, said one Ivy League student who's currently interning at a hedge fund.

Another, who's at a quant firm for the summer, said "I heard it's terrible — I've never heard anyone say, 'Oh, I enjoyed my investment banking experience.'"

At investment banks, interns tend to be Excel jockeys, filling in spreadsheets, creating PowerPoints, and generally doing less fulfilling work. At hedge funds, on the other hand, the interns said they have a bit more responsibility to make real decisions about investments.

This is not the first time we've heard students make claims like this. Remember the 19-year-old hedge fund intern who turned down Goldman Sachs and said junior bankers exaggerate about how hard they work?

The buy-side interns we spoke to agreed that "banking isn't the most intellectually stimulating job."

More at: http://www.businessinsider.com/hedge-fund-intern-a-monkey-could-do-the-…

 

Personally I believe the main reason why students choose banking(despite their ultimate goal being buy-side) right out of undergrad is security. While top buy-side firms(i.e. Silverlake, Blakestone,BainCap) have been recruiting kids right out of college, using banking as a springboard to a top buy-side job is a road that has been tried and tested.

While buy-side right out of school sounds great, I'd be worried about getting a full time offer because school performance is not a great indication of whether or not you'd excel in the workplace.. and at 23 its incredibly difficult to tell. Banking at the junior level may be monkey work, but its part of the industry and definitely a learning experience for bright-eyed kids coming from college.

 
StreetofBulls:

Personally I believe the main reason why students choose banking(despite their ultimate goal being buy-side) right out of undergrad is security. While top buy-side firms(i.e. Silverlake, Blakestone,BainCap) have been recruiting kids right out of college, using banking as a springboard to a top buy-side job is a road that has been tried and tested.

I'm actually uncertain that the premise of this article is correct (especially given that the author does not cite any sources (besides other BI articles that she penned, of course)). Viewing buy-side as a better job than sell-side is not a new phenomenon. I think a better argument to make is that there are more opportunities available today to undergraduates, as more PE firms have opened up analyst programs. However, that doesn't reflect some intrinsic labor market change. College students have wanted to go from IB to PE since time immemorial. Just because they can now enter the buy-side at the analyst level doesn't mean that they didn't already prefer buy-side to sell-side.

 

I've never understood why IB would be very important to HF's other than as a screening process-that a candidate went to a good school, did well, worked hard enough, got through the interviews and background checks and learned to work too many hours for a couple years-and as a sort of hazing like I did it so the new kids should also. Sure you learn how to model but that's not a terribly difficult skill to pick up and I've always thought an investing (like long only) or research role, trading when it's a more trading oriented HF or even consulting where you dive deep into companies would give more applicable skills. But I could be wrong and I'd be interested in hearing from someone with direct experience. I've never been in HF's and may be making assumptions.

On the PE side, and I'm not a prestige whore so it's not about puffing my proverbial PE chest out bragging that all of our analysts are from Goldman or MS, it's far more applicable experience and skills learned. Sure the really large funds have enough resources to bring in a few analysts but most PE firms run lean and just don't have the time or resources to train 22 year olds and the functions you perform as an IB analyst are very similar to those you do in entry level PE. You're actually on the sell side of what PE is buying. You get to know how a transaction works. I just don't see that same relationship between IB and HF.

 
Dingdong08:

I've never understood why IB would be very important to HF's other than as a screening process-that a candidate went to a good school, did well, worked hard enough, got through the interviews and background checks and learned to work too many hours for a couple years-and as a sort of hazing like I did it so the new kids should also. Sure you learn how to model but that's not a terribly difficult skill to pick up and I've always thought an investing (like long only) or research role, trading when it's a more trading oriented HF or even consulting where you dive deep into companies would give more applicable skills. But I could be wrong and I'd be interested in hearing from someone with direct experience. I've never been in HF's and may be making assumptions.

On the PE side, and I'm not a prestige whore so it's not about puffing my proverbial PE chest out bragging that all of our analysts are from Goldman or MS, it's far more applicable experience and skills learned. Sure the really large funds have enough resources to bring in a few analysts but most PE firms run lean and just don't have the time or resources to train 22 year olds and the functions you perform as an IB analyst are very similar to those you do in entry level PE. You're actually on the sell side of what PE is buying. You get to know how a transaction works. I just don't see that same relationship between IB and HF.

My thoughts as well. I always thought that trading/research would be more relevant to HF. Just like IB is more relevant to PE.

Fortes fortuna adiuvat.
 

I worked at a hedge fund out of school and then spent some time doing investment banking. What I will say is that while I found I learned very little in investment banking that would be useful at a hedge fund, I definitely became a better hedge fund analyst because of the time i spent in investment banking. I dont think that you can learn how to use all of the tools (excel, ppt, CapIQ etc) extremely efficiently and without making any mistakes in any way that is more effective then being an investment banking analyst. Being an IB analyst is all about deadlines, instruction following, and being terrified of making any mistakes because not making mistakes is really your only job. Investment banking is like a boot camp that creates people that will be very easy to teach the things they are there to learn. I thought investment banking was joke at first, during, and immediately after but now that I have gone back to do valuation analysis or write up an investment memo after investment banking I realize I am much more efficient and ultimately more effective.

The other thing about investment banking is it teaches you how to do accounting things 100% accurately where frequently the valuation work you do as a hedge fund analyst is 90-95% correct but you assume the 10% that isnt correct cancels itself out kinda. Without investment banking you might not even know how to properly do something (i.e. account for RSUs in the diluted share count) and it is nice to at least know how things should be done. There just isnt that much attention to detail in equity research and the casual pace does not force you to become efficient. I dont mean to generalize, this is just my experience.

 
<em>bingo</em>:

I worked at a hedge fund out of school and then spent some time doing investment banking. What I will say is that while I found I learned very little in investment banking that would be useful at a hedge fund, I definitely became a better hedge fund analyst because of the time i spent in investment banking. I dont think that you can learn how to use all of the tools (excel, ppt, CapIQ etc) extremely efficiently and without making any mistakes in any way that is more effective then being an investment banking analyst. Being an IB analyst is all about deadlines, instruction following, and being terrified of making any mistakes because not making mistakes is really your only job. Investment banking is like a boot camp that creates people that will be very easy to teach the things they are there to learn. I thought investment banking was joke at first, during, and immediately after but now that I have gone back to do valuation analysis or write up an investment memo after investment banking I realize I am much more efficient and ultimately more effective.

The other thing about investment banking is it teaches you how to do accounting things 100% accurately where frequently the valuation work you do as a hedge fund analyst is 90-95% correct but you assume the 10% that isnt correct cancels itself out kinda. Without investment banking you might not even know how to properly do something (i.e. account for RSUs in the diluted share count) and it is nice to at least know how things should be done. There just isnt that much attention to detail in equity research and the casual pace does not force you to become efficient. I dont mean to generalize, this is just my experience.

Bingo, good points. Can you elaborate a little bit on why you think there isn't that much attention to detail in equity research? I'm not disagreeing - I've seen many ER reports with an appalling lack of attention to detail, typos, terrible formatting, etc.

 

To me this logic (a monkey could do it) applies to almost every job. To think that you are going to start immediately on very challenging work is laughable. Young kids out of undergrad usually have delusions of grandeur. They learn about financial strategy or investing and think they will be involved in these processes only to realize they are at the bottom of the totem pole. This is pretty much true in every career path ( IB, engineering, F500) If a monkey can do the modeling then why are mistakes constantly made? If one can't do great analyst work then you're definitely not ready to be "intellectually stimulated". However, it does suck once you get your feet wet.

 

It's all relative. IB is a grind by anyone's standards but compared to most jobs out there it's pretty intellectually stimulating for someone fresh out of undergrad. Buyside jobs are getting towards the extreme tail end of intellectually challenging business-related jobs straight out of college, and there is a very limited number of positions out there.

These guys sound like douches to be honest.

 
GoodBread:

It's all relative. IB is a grind by anyone's standards but compared to most jobs out there it's pretty intellectually stimulating for someone fresh out of undergrad. Buyside jobs are getting towards the extreme tail end of intellectually challenging business-related jobs straight out of college, and there is a very limited number of positions out there.

These guys sound like douches to be honest.

This. People have their heads so far up their asses; they forget that there are jobs out there that monkeys could LITERALLY do.

 

If you seriously think IB isnt stimulating you either:

A) Work in a shit group that does zero real modeling B) Are really that smart and somehow learned it all your two years

Work at a BB's M&A group for two years and tell me you can model everything under the sun, understand legal structuring, why you can do this structure of a deal versus another etc.

Any retard can put together a simple merger model with zero thought put into the assumptions.

 

Any idiot can also basically replicate an index at a hedge fund and outperform a lot of active managers by not trading a whole lot and being patient with quality companies. People think finance is complex and typically when you try to make it that way you end up with a situation like the financial crisis. Lol I love hearing these little arrogant pricks when they're not really doing anything substantial to change the world etc yet think they're so amazing. If you cure cancer etc or other comparable feats then come back and toot your horn. Making investments with other peoples capital then taking exorbitant fees for mediocre performance is laughable and doesn't take any kind of special intellectual capacity.

 
Trueace:

Any idiot can also basically replicate an index at a hedge fund and outperform a lot of active managers by not trading a whole lot and being patient with quality companies. People think finance is complex and typically when you try to make it that way you end up with a situation like the financial crisis. Lol I love hearing these little arrogant pricks when they're not really doing anything substantial to change the world etc yet think they're so amazing. If you cure cancer etc or other comparable feats then come back and toot your horn. Making investments with other peoples capital then taking exorbitant fees for mediocre performance is laughable and doesn't take any kind of special intellectual capacity.

Oh man... Somebody didn't get the banking gig they wanted... https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BCXozoaCMAAVAlg.jpg

 
Trueace:

Any idiot can also basically replicate an index at a hedge fund and outperform a lot of active managers by not trading a whole lot and being patient with quality companies. People think finance is complex and typically when you try to make it that way you end up with a situation like the financial crisis. Lol I love hearing these little arrogant pricks when they're not really doing anything substantial to change the world etc yet think they're so amazing. If you cure cancer etc or other comparable feats then come back and toot your horn. Making investments with other peoples capital then taking exorbitant fees for mediocre performance is laughable and doesn't take any kind of special intellectual capacity.

I agree with the spirit behind this. I've noticed a ton of finance guys seem to forget that their are other industries with incredibly intelligent people in them. Performing well at a IB/HF/PE shop is great, but it doesn't make your smarter than everyone else, especially when you have classmates publishing astrophysics research, at the top of their class at medical school, etc.

 
gunners14n:
Trueace:
Any idiot can also basically replicate an index at a hedge fund and outperform a lot of active managers by not trading a whole lot and being patient with quality companies. People think finance is complex and typically when you try to make it that way you end up with a situation like the financial crisis. Lol I love hearing these little arrogant pricks when they're not really doing anything substantial to change the world etc yet think they're so amazing. If you cure cancer etc or other comparable feats then come back and toot your horn. Making investments with other peoples capital then taking exorbitant fees for mediocre performance is laughable and doesn't take any kind of special intellectual capacity.

I agree with the spirit behind this. I've noticed a ton of finance guys seem to forget that their are other industries with incredibly intelligent people in them. Performing well at a IB/HF/PE shop is great, but it doesn't make your smarter than everyone else, especially when you have classmates publishing astrophysics research, at the top of their class at medical school, etc.

yes.. but that is a given.. nobody I know who got into banking wanted or cared about being smart... it was and is always about the money..

 
Best Response

Disclaimer: I put in my two years time at a BB, so everything I say is from that lens

Obviously a lot of what an analyst does day to day in IBD isn't incredibly difficult. However, coming out of a two year program you'll have good modeling knowledge, outstanding raw speed in excel (which is actually important if you want even marginally better hours in PE), great time management skills, the ability to think about valuation of an asset at a very core level, and solid communication / email etiquette / prioritization / other soft skills. For a 24 year old that's an extremely valuable set of skills to have developed so early in a career.

Based only on my anecdotal experience, associates who come from a banking analyst background are far, far more equipped to handle the PE associate job, and to advance upward in the organization, than folks from consulting / industry / other backgrounds (including PE analyst). The advantage is shown in modeling skills, but also in ability to be thoughtful around investments, manage workflow and competing priorities, and work appropriately within the structure of a team. Even when the end goal is buyside, as is typical, the 2 year IB program provides huge lift vs another career starting point.

 
fryguy22:

Disclaimer: I put in my two years time at a BB, so everything I say is from that lens

Obviously a lot of what an analyst does day to day in IBD isn't incredibly difficult. However, coming out of a two year program you'll have good modeling knowledge, outstanding raw speed in excel (which is actually important if you want even marginally better hours in PE), great time management skills, the ability to think about valuation of an asset at a very core level, and solid communication / email etiquette / prioritization / other soft skills. For a 24 year old that's an extremely valuable set of skills to have developed so early in a career.

Based only on my anecdotal experience, associates who come from a banking analyst background are far, far more equipped to handle the PE associate job, and to advance upward in the organization, than folks from consulting / industry / other backgrounds (including PE analyst). The advantage is shown in modeling skills, but also in ability to be thoughtful around investments, manage workflow and competing priorities, and work appropriately within the structure of a team. Even when the end goal is buyside, as is typical, the 2 year IB program provides huge lift vs another career starting point.

What does the equity risk premium represent? How would you discount cash flows in March for an entity with a November 30th fiscal YE?

“Elections are a futures market for stolen property”
 
fryguy22:

Based only on my anecdotal experience, associates who come from a banking analyst background are far, far more equipped to handle the PE associate job, and to advance upward in the organization, than folks from consulting / industry / other backgrounds (including PE analyst). The advantage is shown in modeling skills, but also in ability to be thoughtful around investments, manage workflow and competing priorities, and work appropriately within the structure of a team. Even when the end goal is buyside, as is typical, the 2 year IB program provides huge lift vs another career starting point.

I think there's definitely something to be said for IB -> PE versus CO -> PE or some other track. However, based on my own anecdotal experience, the people I know that went directly to the buyside after undergrad were brilliant. I don't think they've been limited by not having gone through a two-year banking analyst position. Plus, they all unequivocally did two summers at legit firms (i.e. Blackstone, Goldman, Silver Point). I know it's not the same as a full-time analyst role, but we're talking about the absolute cream of the crop here.

Of course, this is also just anecdotal, and with massive sampling bias.

 
fryguy22:

Disclaimer: I put in my two years time at a BB, so everything I say is from that lens

Obviously a lot of what an analyst does day to day in IBD isn't incredibly difficult. However, coming out of a two year program you'll have good modeling knowledge, outstanding raw speed in excel (which is actually important if you want even marginally better hours in PE), great time management skills, the ability to think about valuation of an asset at a very core level, and solid communication / email etiquette / prioritization / other soft skills. For a 24 year old that's an extremely valuable set of skills to have developed so early in a career.

Based only on my anecdotal experience, associates who come from a banking analyst background are far, far more equipped to handle the PE associate job, and to advance upward in the organization, than folks from consulting / industry / other backgrounds (including PE analyst). The advantage is shown in modeling skills, but also in ability to be thoughtful around investments, manage workflow and competing priorities, and work appropriately within the structure of a team. Even when the end goal is buyside, as is typical, the 2 year IB program provides huge lift vs another career starting point.

So you are saying that only banking analysts have "modeling skills, but also in ability to be thoughtful around investments, manage workflow and competing priorities, and work appropriately within the structure of a team"? Consultants and private equity analysts do not have those skills? My issue with your post is that you make some good points about the skills you learn in investment banking but those skills are not even remotely unique to investment banking. You think you do not have competing priorities in consulting or that you do not model as a private equity analyst?

"Far, far more equipped to handle the PE associate job" is a very bold and completely wrong statement. I have seen enough private equity analysts who made it to private equity associate and all of them were considerably more thoughtful about investments in year 1 of their associate program than any investment banker. I do not know enough consultants in private equity but based on the fact that many shops hire them I would assume that they are doing something right.

I am honestly surprised how your post goes from a very good one in the first paragraph to complete BS in the second. The private equity analyst program, investment banking and consulting are all good paths to get into the private equity associate program and saying that one of them is "far, far" better is just nonsense.

 
tzhou91:
fryguy22:
Disclaimer: I put in my two years time at a BB, so everything I say is from that lens
Obviously a lot of what an analyst does day to day in IBD isn't incredibly difficult. However, coming out of a two year program you'll have good modeling knowledge, outstanding raw speed in excel (which is actually important if you want even marginally better hours in PE), great time management skills, the ability to think about valuation of an asset at a very core level, and solid communication / email etiquette / prioritization / other soft skills. For a 24 year old that's an extremely valuable set of skills to have developed so early in a career.
Based only on my anecdotal experience, associates who come from a banking analyst background are far, far more equipped to handle the PE associate job, and to advance upward in the organization, than folks from consulting / industry / other backgrounds (including PE analyst). The advantage is shown in modeling skills, but also in ability to be thoughtful around investments, manage workflow and competing priorities, and work appropriately within the structure of a team. Even when the end goal is buyside, as is typical, the 2 year IB program provides huge lift vs another career starting point.

So you are saying that only banking analysts have "modeling skills, but also in ability to be thoughtful around investments, manage workflow and competing priorities, and work appropriately within the structure of a team"? Consultants and private equity analysts do not have those skills? My issue with your post is that you make some good points about the skills you learn in investment banking but those skills are not even remotely unique to investment banking. You think you do not have competing priorities in consulting or that you do not model as a private equity analyst?

"Far, far more equipped to handle the PE associate job" is a very bold and completely wrong statement. I have seen enough private equity analysts who made it to private equity associate and all of them were considerably more thoughtful about investments in year 1 of their associate program than any investment banker. I do not know enough consultants in private equity but based on the fact that many shops hire them I would assume that they are doing something right.

I am honestly surprised how your post goes from a very good one in the first paragraph to complete BS in the second. The private equity analyst program, investment banking and consulting are all good paths to get into the private equity associate program and saying that one of them is "far, far" better is just nonsense.

I'm sorry that you appear to have read my post in clear absolutes - next time I'll keep in mind that one disclaimer type sentence per paragraph isn't enough.

No, I don't think [many] PE analysts gain great modeling experience. Again, anecdotal. I'm fairly in tune with the space though and I talk daily with 10+ of them, so I do have a few data points.

You're ABSOLUTELY right that PE analysts who make it to associate are often very thoughtful about investing and have great skills. My observation - they've generally done it by going above and beyond and soaking everything up, and getting a bit lucky with staffings / deals. Lots of PE analysts don't make it to associate, at which point options are significantly more closed off than coming from banking (but still good, don't get me wrong)

I just want to stress again - I didn't say consulting or PE analyst are not "good paths to get into the private equity associate program". I thought I was pretty clear that based only on my anecdotal experience, bankers coming into PE are by far the most likely to succeed.

 

Banking is the Karate Kid doing wax on wax off for two years.

Yes, its shit but what you don't realise is you are actually picking up valuable skills that will be useful down the road.

I am not gonna say people should not go direct to buyside if they have the opportunity but anybody who says two years experience working on transactions in such a commercial environment where your technical and communication skills are tested to the limit is not valuable is talking horse shit imo.

 

Banking is valuable because A) it cams 3-4 years of work experience into 2, B) it trains people into being anal retentive assholes about detail and accuracy, C) it trains you to model

Is it "stimulating"? No. Absolutely not. But is there another job that will give you the same tool kit after 2 years? No. You aren't being taught to think critically. You are being taught to data dump, learn quickly, model accurately and output.

NO job, training, class, etc will teach you to be an investor but banking gives you a tool kit for the job

 

TDSWIM It depends if it sell-side or buy-side equity research. A sell-side analyst puts more attention to the smaller details because every model or report he puts out needs to be defended since the whole street sees it.

The detail required for buy-side research depends on the investment strategy of the firm and the team, but in general it is less precise because it is only seen by you and your team. Additionally, you are covering a much larger pool of stocks as everything in your market cap/orientation can be an investable idea. Many times portfolio managers are more interested in the "story", or catalysts that will drive growth. Often modeling is just used quickly to figure out what assumptions the street is making in order to gauge whether catalysts are priced in or not.

 

This article is clickbait trash and was written only to stir up conflict which has unfortunately worked.

Most people on the buyside came from the sell-side and that's unlikely to change. Neither side is rocket science or applied mathematics and from my experience neither side talks shit about each other , we are doing our jobs and trying to survive.

 
dutchduke:

This article is clickbait trash and was written only to stir up conflict which has unfortunately worked.

Most people on the buyside came from the sell-side and that's unlikely to change. Neither side is rocket science or applied mathematics and from my experience neither side talks shit about each other , we are doing our jobs and trying to survive.

80% of buyside professionals have negative opinions of sellsiders. Science.

Bankers: Aholes in suits looking for commissions Brokers: Aholes looking for commissions ER: Aholes with half baked models and questionable assumptions

Pennies from JcPenny
 
jcpenny:
dutchduke:
This article is clickbait trash and was written only to stir up conflict which has unfortunately worked.
Most people on the buyside came from the sell-side and that's unlikely to change. Neither side is rocket science or applied mathematics and from my experience neither side talks shit about each other , we are doing our jobs and trying to survive.

80% of buyside professionals have negative opinions of sellsiders. Science.

Bankers: Aholes in suits looking for commissions
Brokers: Aholes looking for commissions
ER: Aholes with half baked models and questionable assumptions

Maybe at your shop, but at my HF (30B+ AUM) that's not the case and anyone behaving that way would be considered immature and unsophisticated anyway

 

Blanditiis vero architecto suscipit officia accusamus voluptatibus. Illo odit sed animi odit fugit. Adipisci inventore sunt illo maiores unde tempora amet.

Qui aspernatur tempora unde deserunt. Reprehenderit doloremque impedit quos labore fugiat optio aut. Quae dolorum consequatur aut est. Culpa doloribus enim eos nobis.

Eos iusto laudantium fugiat quis ut nisi. Rem ut ratione necessitatibus voluptatem consequuntur. Eos ex ipsa et omnis. Aut autem molestias odit ullam quis. Velit quibusdam sapiente at quis consequuntur eum.

Quas sed est eveniet qui. Tenetur omnis blanditiis dolores deserunt temporibus. Voluptates error ea et quae nihil. Consectetur aut a nostrum doloribus minus.

 

In nulla architecto exercitationem aliquid. Error cum magnam ut cum qui enim dignissimos earum. Beatae et voluptas illo.

Ipsam dolor eum in illo reiciendis voluptas. Corporis libero autem quisquam exercitationem. Voluptas et iste laudantium. Accusamus officiis ad sunt dignissimos ea. Repellendus est quisquam et assumenda deleniti iure.

In beatae fugit animi velit. Saepe ut sed reiciendis est. Aut ea eligendi eos. Veniam voluptas sint vero.

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (202) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (144) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
6
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
bolo up's picture
bolo up
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”