How Much Do FT Analysts Know Before Start (GS,MS,BX)?

A friend of mine (and yes, in this situation it actually is a friend) is starting at a GS TMT/MS M&A/ BX type ibanking job (won't say which to remain anonymous). He is quite nervous because he did an internship at a different firm and not in banking, and got really lucky with getting the job. He doesn't know much about excel and has never modeled anything, but he is pretty good at understanding finance. How much really do FT analysts starting at these groups know before?

 

Can't really speak for BX, but for GS and MS, I really don't think analysts necessarily need to know too much modeling and excel, as I believe all the groups train together, and many students are former liberal arts majors and whatnot that have very little finance/excel knowledge.

For what it's worth, I know that at other elite boutique advisory firms, there are still many new analysts who aren't necessarily amazing at modeling and excel, and the several weeks of training helps a lot, as long as people actually take training seriously.

 
Best Response

I'm in one of those groups mentioned, and I can state with certainty that most people don't enter with a real mastery of Excel or tremendous knowledge in valuation or modeling. What I noticed immediately about my peers' profiles it that almost everyone can be categorized as one of three extremes:

1) great school (and I mean Harvard, Wharton, Stanford, or Yale) - average-ish grades in a softer subject - strong network that helped assure them their place and perpetuate the success of their families

2) relatively no-name school (as far as the Street is concerned, i.e.: Baruch, University of Georgia, Yeshiva University, Florida State University, etc.) - stellar grades in a demanding subject [STEM, dual major in finance + other quanty subject, etc.] - leadership positions in influential (but unrelated to finance organizations, i.e.: fraternity, student government) - unique backgrounds (prominent athlete, musician, some other x-factor that got somebody's attention) - an absolute hustler who just broke down every barrier to the point that someone simply said 'I want this kid in our group because of how strong their character is'

3) middle-of-the-pack school (might be a "target" as far as this site is concerned but nothing spectacular, i.e.: Stern, Ross, UVA, Berkeley, Brown, Cornell, etc.) - average-to-above-average grades - absolutely stacked resumes (competitive internships since day one, I'm talking premiere-name, BB rotational things: one of the 10 kids in MS' sophomore IBD program/12 in UBS President's sophomore program/100 at UBS Sophomore Symposium/8 in CS' Douglas Paul/15 in BAML sophomore IBD/12 in Citi Diversity sophomore/etc.) - case competitions - frosh/sophomore programs at every bank - leadership in both on-and off-campus organizations related to industry (investment club, finance club, banking boot camp, or special program run by the school, i.e. the one at IU Kelley) - too much good stuff to fit comfortably on a one-page resume

I'm not going to soliloquize as to the details of what a "target" is, whether Brown is as good as Dartmouth for recruiting, how great Stern's recruiting might be, or "how on earth can someone from Baruch beat me into GS TMT!?" That isn't the point of this. I'm simply speaking from first-hand insight on the composition of these groups. Long story short, as you can see, the likelihood that someone coming in with great technical mastery is pretty low. Unless you fit in that last bucket, you're probably someone who's either: - smart because you enjoyed enough educational opportunity all your life and capitalized on your formative years + were conceived to intelligent parents - balanced in street-smarts and book-smarts + are hard-working, resourceful, and scrappy

In all likelihood, neither of those profiles would mean you've had extensive exposure to Excel, modeling, or valuation in a real-world environment (read: outside the classroom, if at all). In contrast, there's those precious few kids who nabbed the UBS frosh summer analyst gig, skipped one week in the middle of it to go to the GS freshman forum, went to MS for the sophomore IBD program, left for GS for junior summer in FIG/TMT/what-have-you, decided 'might as well take the BX M&A interview' that August, and ended up there for full-time. That guy has been exposed constantly to real projects, given real responsibilities, seen some real deals, and garnered some real skills along the way. In training, he's the guy at happy hour every single night while others stay to finish the assignments he crushed before 10am, texting every single minute of the day to all of his friends at the five different banks he's worked at, out in the Hamptons every weekend with second-years at other banks, and getting the best staffings right out of the gate when his class hits the desk after Labor Day.

Why? Because he's been crushing it all along, and the end result of his four years of a pure and undistracted focus on finance throughout college is a well-oiled, eagle-eyed, calculating machine clad in an understated but bespoke suit, ready to shoot M&A lasers out of his elbows (props if you get the reference), adeptly banging on his keyboard for 18 hours a day while his seatmate during training from Harvard whose uncle is a Partner at CD&R is still learning ALT-E-S-T.

Whether you believe that singular focus is healthy and wholesome or not, I can't judge. I can simply say that of the 24 interns this year in GS FIG, the 14 in TMT, the 7 at Blackstone Restructuring, etc., the above is very true. From my experience (if you can't tell which I fall into, I haven't been nearly as obvious as I suspect I have in this sleep-deprived state), elite boutiques tend to appreciate the first and last profile the most, whereas the BB banks very often go for the second given that they know their classes are so much larger and there are enough seats that the 'expenditure' on someone like that can be 'justified' more easily than when you have 8 seats to fill in the top restructuring group on the Street and need some real heavy hitters.

This is why GS FIG and TMT classes look the way they do, while BX R&R is usually 5-6 kids from Harvard and Wharton (often M&T) + 1-2 guys from Stern/Ross/Georgetown/Duke. Did not mean to ramble; hope people find this helpful.

I am permanently behind on PMs, it's not personal.
 
APAE:

I'm in one of those groups mentioned, and I can state with certainty that most people don't enter with a real mastery of Excel or tremendous knowledge in valuation or modeling. What I noticed immediately about my peers' profiles it that almost everyone can be categorized as one of three extremes:

1) great school (and I mean Harvard, Wharton, Stanford, or Yale)
- average-ish grades in a softer subject
- strong network that helped assure them their place and perpetuate the success of their families

2) relatively no-name school (as far as the Street is concerned, i.e.: Baruch, University of Georgia, Yeshiva University, Florida State University, etc.)
- stellar grades in a demanding subject [STEM, dual major in finance + other quanty subject, etc.]
- leadership positions in influential (but unrelated to finance organizations, i.e.: fraternity, student government)
- unique backgrounds (prominent athlete, musician, some other x-factor that got somebody's attention)
- an absolute hustler who just broke down every barrier to the point that someone simply said 'I want this kid in our group because of how strong their character is'

3) middle-of-the-pack school (might be a "target" as far as this site is concerned but nothing spectacular, i.e.: Stern, Ross, UVA, Berkeley, Brown, Cornell, etc.)
- average-to-above-average grades
- absolutely stacked resumes (competitive internships since day one, I'm talking premiere-name, BB rotational things: one of the 10 kids in MS' sophomore IBD program/12 in UBS President's sophomore program/100 at UBS Sophomore Symposium/8 in CS' Douglas Paul/15 in BAML sophomore IBD/12 in Citi Diversity sophomore/etc.)
- case competitions
- frosh/sophomore programs at every bank
- leadership in both on-and off-campus organizations related to industry (investment club, finance club, banking boot camp, or special program run by the school, i.e. the one at IU Kelley)
- too much good stuff to fit comfortably on a one-page resume

I'm not going to soliloquize as to the details of what a "target" is, whether Brown is as good as Dartmouth for recruiting, how great Stern's recruiting might be, or "how on earth can someone from Baruch beat me into GS TMT!?" That isn't the point of this. I'm simply speaking from first-hand insight on the composition of these groups. Long story short, as you can see, the likelihood that someone coming in with great technical mastery is pretty low. Unless you fit in that last bucket, you're probably someone who's either:
- smart because you enjoyed enough educational opportunity all your life and capitalized on your formative years + were conceived to intelligent parents
- balanced in street-smarts and book-smarts + are hard-working, resourceful, and scrappy

In all likelihood, neither of those profiles would mean you've had extensive exposure to Excel, modeling, or valuation in a real-world environment (read: outside the classroom, if at all). In contrast, there's those precious few kids who nabbed the UBS frosh summer analyst gig, skipped one week in the middle of it to go to the GS freshman forum, went to MS for the sophomore IBD program, left for GS for junior summer in FIG/TMT/what-have-you, decided 'might as well take the BX M&A interview' that August, and ended up there for full-time. That guy has been exposed constantly to real projects, given real responsibilities, seen some real deals, and garnered some real skills along the way. In training, he's the guy at happy hour every single night while others stay to finish the assignments he crushed before 10am, texting every single minute of the day to all of his friends at the five different banks he's worked at, out in the Hamptons every weekend with second-years at other banks, and getting the best staffings right out of the gate when his class hits the desk after Labor Day.

Why? Because he's been crushing it all along, and the end result of his four years of a pure and undistracted focus on finance throughout college is a well-oiled, eagle-eyed, calculating machine clad in an understated but bespoke suit, ready to shoot M&A lasers out of his elbows (props if you get the reference), adeptly banging on his keyboard for 18 hours a day while his seatmate during training from Harvard whose uncle is a Partner at CD&R is still learning ALT-E-S-T.

Whether you believe that singular focus is healthy and wholesome or not, I can't judge. I can simply say that of the 24 interns this year in GS FIG, the 14 in TMT, the 7 at Blackstone Restructuring, etc., the above is very true. From my experience (if you can't tell which I fall into, I haven't been nearly as obvious as I suspect I have in this sleep-deprived state), elite boutiques tend to appreciate the first and last profile the most, whereas the BB banks very often go for the second given that they know their classes are so much larger and there are enough seats that the 'expenditure' on someone like that can be 'justified' more easily than when you have 8 seats to fill in the top restructuring group on the Street and need some real heavy hitters.

This is why GS FIG and TMT classes look the way they do, while BX R&R is usually 5-6 kids from Harvard and Wharton (often M&T) + 1-2 guys from Stern/Ross/Georgetown/Duke. Did not mean to ramble; hope people find this helpful.

Fantastic post, didn't realize how much of a boss you were, M&A lasers out of your elbows and all (kudos to LSO).

 
APAE:

I'm in one of those groups mentioned, and I can state with certainty that most people don't enter with a real mastery of Excel or tremendous knowledge in valuation or modeling. What I noticed immediately about my peers' profiles it that almost everyone can be categorized as one of three extremes:

1) great school (and I mean Harvard, Wharton, Stanford, or Yale)
- average-ish grades in a softer subject
- strong network that helped assure them their place and perpetuate the success of their families

2) relatively no-name school (as far as the Street is concerned, i.e.: Baruch, University of Georgia, Yeshiva University, Florida State University, etc.)
- stellar grades in a demanding subject [STEM, dual major in finance + other quanty subject, etc.]
- leadership positions in influential (but unrelated to finance organizations, i.e.: fraternity, student government)
- unique backgrounds (prominent athlete, musician, some other x-factor that got somebody's attention)
- an absolute hustler who just broke down every barrier to the point that someone simply said 'I want this kid in our group because of how strong their character is'

3) middle-of-the-pack school (might be a "target" as far as this site is concerned but nothing spectacular, i.e.: Stern, Ross, UVA, Berkeley, Brown, Cornell, etc.)
- average-to-above-average grades
- absolutely stacked resumes (competitive internships since day one, I'm talking premiere-name, BB rotational things: one of the 10 kids in MS' sophomore IBD program/12 in UBS President's sophomore program/100 at UBS Sophomore Symposium/8 in CS' Douglas Paul/15 in BAML sophomore IBD/12 in Citi Diversity sophomore/etc.)
- case competitions
- frosh/sophomore programs at every bank
- leadership in both on-and off-campus organizations related to industry (investment club, finance club, banking boot camp, or special program run by the school, i.e. the one at IU Kelley)
- too much good stuff to fit comfortably on a one-page resume

I'm not going to soliloquize as to the details of what a "target" is, whether Brown is as good as Dartmouth for recruiting, how great Stern's recruiting might be, or "how on earth can someone from Baruch beat me into GS TMT!?" That isn't the point of this. I'm simply speaking from first-hand insight on the composition of these groups. Long story short, as you can see, the likelihood that someone coming in with great technical mastery is pretty low. Unless you fit in that last bucket, you're probably someone who's either:
- smart because you enjoyed enough educational opportunity all your life and capitalized on your formative years + were conceived to intelligent parents
- balanced in street-smarts and book-smarts + are hard-working, resourceful, and scrappy

In all likelihood, neither of those profiles would mean you've had extensive exposure to Excel, modeling, or valuation in a real-world environment (read: outside the classroom, if at all). In contrast, there's those precious few kids who nabbed the UBS frosh summer analyst gig, skipped one week in the middle of it to go to the GS freshman forum, went to MS for the sophomore IBD program, left for GS for junior summer in FIG/TMT/what-have-you, decided 'might as well take the BX M&A interview' that August, and ended up there for full-time. That guy has been exposed constantly to real projects, given real responsibilities, seen some real deals, and garnered some real skills along the way. In training, he's the guy at happy hour every single night while others stay to finish the assignments he crushed before 10am, texting every single minute of the day to all of his friends at the five different banks he's worked at, out in the Hamptons every weekend with second-years at other banks, and getting the best staffings right out of the gate when his class hits the desk after Labor Day.

Why? Because he's been crushing it all along, and the end result of his four years of a pure and undistracted focus on finance throughout college is a well-oiled, eagle-eyed, calculating machine clad in an understated but bespoke suit, ready to shoot M&A lasers out of his elbows (props if you get the reference), adeptly banging on his keyboard for 18 hours a day while his seatmate during training from Harvard whose uncle is a Partner at CD&R is still learning ALT-E-S-T.

Whether you believe that singular focus is healthy and wholesome or not, I can't judge. I can simply say that of the 24 interns this year in GS FIG, the 14 in TMT, the 7 at Blackstone Restructuring, etc., the above is very true. From my experience (if you can't tell which I fall into, I haven't been nearly as obvious as I suspect I have in this sleep-deprived state), elite boutiques tend to appreciate the first and last profile the most, whereas the BB banks very often go for the second given that they know their classes are so much larger and there are enough seats that the 'expenditure' on someone like that can be 'justified' more easily than when you have 8 seats to fill in the top restructuring group on the Street and need some real heavy hitters.

This is why GS FIG and TMT classes look the way they do, while BX R&R is usually 5-6 kids from Harvard and Wharton (often M&T) + 1-2 guys from Stern/Ross/Georgetown/Duke. Did not mean to ramble; hope people find this helpful.

So much arrogance in one post I can't even...

 
HarvardOrBust:

So much arrogance in one post I can't even...

I apologize if that offended you. Notice though, that nowhere did I say I was the finance all-star. I won't lie; my Excel skills weren't the strongest going in, and I'm still probably not near the top of my analyst class. I won't apologize for my success; I feel that I've worked tremendously hard to get where I am now, I am incredibly appreciative of it, and I hope to only buckle down even further. I did have a ton of experience all throughout college, but I certainly am not the benchmark for perfection by any means. Most people respond warmly to my work ethic, however, and that seems to have carried me thus far in my career. I didn't go to the best school, I didn't have the best grades, and I certainly didn't have the greatest technical mastery during recruiting. I kind of cross two of those buckets, which is why I so emphatically couched my words with room for exception ("usually," "typically," "almost everyone").

Enjoy your weekend. Thankfully I think I will have a fairly quiet one.

I am permanently behind on PMs, it's not personal.
 
APAE:
HarvardOrBust:

So much arrogance in one post I can't even...

I apologize if that offended you. Notice though, that nowhere did I say I was the finance all-star. I won't lie; my Excel skills weren't the strongest going in, and I'm still probably not near the top of my analyst class. I won't apologize for my success; I feel that I've worked tremendously hard to get where I am now, I am incredibly appreciative of it, and I hope to only buckle down even further. I did have a ton of experience all throughout college, but I certainly am not the benchmark for perfection by any means. Most people respond warmly to my work ethic, however, and that seems to have carried me thus far in my career. I didn't go to the best school, I didn't have the best grades, and I certainly didn't have the greatest technical mastery during recruiting. I kind of cross two of those buckets, which is why I so emphatically couched my words with room for exception ("usually," "typically," "almost everyone").

Enjoy your weekend. Thankfully I think I will have a fairly quiet one.

Didn't really see arrogance in that post. Great stuff, APAE - definitely spot on. I'm in one of the groups you mentioned above, and agree with your analysis. Question: if I fall into the first (i.e. top target with little finance experience) group, what can I do during my senior year to become more useful/efficient as an analyst? I'm probably smarter than the Michigan/UVA/Texas kids in my group, but I just haven't had the exposure to finance that they have. What's the best way through which I can make up that difference during my senior year so that I hit the ground running when I join full time?

dollas
 
boobielover:
APAE:
HarvardOrBust:

So much arrogance in one post I can't even...

I apologize if that offended you. Notice though, that nowhere did I say I was the finance all-star. I won't lie; my Excel skills weren't the strongest going in, and I'm still probably not near the top of my analyst class. I won't apologize for my success; I feel that I've worked tremendously hard to get where I am now, I am incredibly appreciative of it, and I hope to only buckle down even further. I did have a ton of experience all throughout college, but I certainly am not the benchmark for perfection by any means. Most people respond warmly to my work ethic, however, and that seems to have carried me thus far in my career. I didn't go to the best school, I didn't have the best grades, and I certainly didn't have the greatest technical mastery during recruiting. I kind of cross two of those buckets, which is why I so emphatically couched my words with room for exception ("usually," "typically," "almost everyone").

Enjoy your weekend. Thankfully I think I will have a fairly quiet one.

Didn't really see arrogance in that post. Great stuff, APAE - definitely spot on. I'm in one of the groups you mentioned above, and agree with your analysis. Question: if I fall into the first (i.e. top target with little finance experience) group, what can I do during my senior year to become more useful/efficient as an analyst? I'm probably smarter than the Michigan/UVA/Texas kids in my group, but I just haven't had the exposure to finance that they have. What's the best way through which I can make up that difference during my senior year so that I hit the ground running when I join full time?

To me, that smacks of arrogance the most of any comment so far. Who is to say who has more intelligence? There's an entire host of factors that go into college choice; admission is only one of them (financial, geographic, family, etc. etc.).

Regardless, to prepare yourself, read and talk. Read all the books, the guides, the industry reports, the forums, all the material that is available through the Internet; immerse yourself, because the 'less intelligent' kid from Texas or Ross has been doing it since sophomore year and is more knowledgeable and conversant than you because he cares to be. On top of that, get in front of as many people as you can who are already in the industry. You go to a good school, so leverage the alumni network. Speak to as many people at your firm as you can, speak to as many fraternity/club/sport/extracurricular alumni as will answer your emails or calls; learn from people whose footsteps you follow. There is always room to learn.

I am permanently behind on PMs, it's not personal.
 
APAE:

I'm in one of those groups mentioned, and I can state with certainty that most people don't enter with a real mastery of Excel or tremendous knowledge in valuation or modeling. What I noticed immediately about my peers' profiles it that almost everyone can be categorized as one of three extremes:

1) great school (and I mean Harvard, Wharton, Stanford, or Yale)
- average-ish grades in a softer subject
- strong network that helped assure them their place and perpetuate the success of their families

2) relatively no-name school (as far as the Street is concerned, i.e.: Baruch, University of Georgia, Yeshiva University, Florida State University, etc.)
- stellar grades in a demanding subject [STEM, dual major in finance + other quanty subject, etc.]
- leadership positions in influential (but unrelated to finance organizations, i.e.: fraternity, student government)
- unique backgrounds (prominent athlete, musician, some other x-factor that got somebody's attention)
- an absolute hustler who just broke down every barrier to the point that someone simply said 'I want this kid in our group because of how strong their character is'

3) middle-of-the-pack school (might be a "target" as far as this site is concerned but nothing spectacular, i.e.: Stern, Ross, UVA, Berkeley, Brown, Cornell, etc.)
- average-to-above-average grades
- absolutely stacked resumes (competitive internships since day one, I'm talking premiere-name, BB rotational things: one of the 10 kids in MS' sophomore IBD program/12 in UBS President's sophomore program/100 at UBS Sophomore Symposium/8 in CS' Douglas Paul/15 in BAML sophomore IBD/12 in Citi Diversity sophomore/etc.)
- case competitions
- frosh/sophomore programs at every bank
- leadership in both on-and off-campus organizations related to industry (investment club, finance club, banking boot camp, or special program run by the school, i.e. the one at IU Kelley)
- too much good stuff to fit comfortably on a one-page resume

I'm not going to soliloquize as to the details of what a "target" is, whether Brown is as good as Dartmouth for recruiting, how great Stern's recruiting might be, or "how on earth can someone from Baruch beat me into GS TMT!?" That isn't the point of this. I'm simply speaking from first-hand insight on the composition of these groups. Long story short, as you can see, the likelihood that someone coming in with great technical mastery is pretty low. Unless you fit in that last bucket, you're probably someone who's either:
- smart because you enjoyed enough educational opportunity all your life and capitalized on your formative years + were conceived to intelligent parents
- balanced in street-smarts and book-smarts + are hard-working, resourceful, and scrappy

In all likelihood, neither of those profiles would mean you've had extensive exposure to Excel, modeling, or valuation in a real-world environment (read: outside the classroom, if at all). In contrast, there's those precious few kids who nabbed the UBS frosh summer analyst gig, skipped one week in the middle of it to go to the GS freshman forum, went to MS for the sophomore IBD program, left for GS for junior summer in FIG/TMT/what-have-you, decided 'might as well take the BX M&A interview' that August, and ended up there for full-time. That guy has been exposed constantly to real projects, given real responsibilities, seen some real deals, and garnered some real skills along the way. In training, he's the guy at happy hour every single night while others stay to finish the assignments he crushed before 10am, texting every single minute of the day to all of his friends at the five different banks he's worked at, out in the Hamptons every weekend with second-years at other banks, and getting the best staffings right out of the gate when his class hits the desk after Labor Day.

Why? Because he's been crushing it all along, and the end result of his four years of a pure and undistracted focus on finance throughout college is a well-oiled, eagle-eyed, calculating machine clad in an understated but bespoke suit, ready to shoot M&A lasers out of his elbows (props if you get the reference), adeptly banging on his keyboard for 18 hours a day while his seatmate during training from Harvard whose uncle is a Partner at CD&R is still learning ALT-E-S-T.

Whether you believe that singular focus is healthy and wholesome or not, I can't judge. I can simply say that of the 24 interns this year in GS FIG, the 14 in TMT, the 7 at Blackstone Restructuring, etc., the above is very true. From my experience (if you can't tell which I fall into, I haven't been nearly as obvious as I suspect I have in this sleep-deprived state), elite boutiques tend to appreciate the first and last profile the most, whereas the BB banks very often go for the second given that they know their classes are so much larger and there are enough seats that the 'expenditure' on someone like that can be 'justified' more easily than when you have 8 seats to fill in the top restructuring group on the Street and need some real heavy hitters.

This is why GS FIG and TMT classes look the way they do, while BX R&R is usually 5-6 kids from Harvard and Wharton (often M&T) + 1-2 guys from Stern/Ross/Georgetown/Duke. Did not mean to ramble; hope people find this helpful.

this is amazing, and yes your reference is as well

Commercial Real Estate Developer
 

If he starts FT, he'll go through 3-6 weeks of training anyway, so no need to worry about anything from the start.

I'm talking about liquid. Rich enough to have your own jet. Rich enough not to waste time. Fifty, a hundred million dollars, buddy. A player. Or nothing. See my Blog & AMA
 
APAE:

I'm in one of those groups mentioned, and I can state with certainty that most people don't enter with a real mastery of Excel or tremendous knowledge in valuation or modeling. What I noticed immediately about my peers' profiles it that almost everyone can be categorized as one of three extremes:

1) great school (and I mean Harvard, Wharton, Stanford, or Yale)
- average-ish grades in a softer subject
- strong network that helped assure them their place and perpetuate the success of their families

2) relatively no-name school (as far as the Street is concerned, i.e.: Baruch, University of Georgia, Yeshiva University, Florida State University, etc.)
- stellar grades in a demanding subject [STEM, dual major in finance + other quanty subject, etc.]
- leadership positions in influential (but unrelated to finance organizations, i.e.: fraternity, student government)
- unique backgrounds (prominent athlete, musician, some other x-factor that got somebody's attention)
- an absolute hustler who just broke down every barrier to the point that someone simply said 'I want this kid in our group because of how strong their character is'

3) middle-of-the-pack school (might be a "target" as far as this site is concerned but nothing spectacular, i.e.: Stern, Ross, UVA, Berkeley, Brown, Cornell, etc.)
- average-to-above-average grades
- absolutely stacked resumes (competitive internships since day one, I'm talking premiere-name, BB rotational things: one of the 10 kids in MS' sophomore IBD program/12 in UBS President's sophomore program/100 at UBS Sophomore Symposium/8 in CS' Douglas Paul/15 in BAML sophomore IBD/12 in Citi Diversity sophomore/etc.)
- case competitions
- frosh/sophomore programs at every bank
- leadership in both on-and off-campus organizations related to industry (investment club, finance club, banking boot camp, or special program run by the school, i.e. the one at IU Kelley)
- too much good stuff to fit comfortably on a one-page resume

I'm not going to soliloquize as to the details of what a "target" is, whether Brown is as good as Dartmouth for recruiting, how great Stern's recruiting might be, or "how on earth can someone from Baruch beat me into GS TMT!?" That isn't the point of this. I'm simply speaking from first-hand insight on the composition of these groups. Long story short, as you can see, the likelihood that someone coming in with great technical mastery is pretty low. Unless you fit in that last bucket, you're probably someone who's either:
- smart because you enjoyed enough educational opportunity all your life and capitalized on your formative years + were conceived to intelligent parents
- balanced in street-smarts and book-smarts + are hard-working, resourceful, and scrappy

In all likelihood, neither of those profiles would mean you've had extensive exposure to Excel, modeling, or valuation in a real-world environment (read: outside the classroom, if at all). In contrast, there's those precious few kids who nabbed the UBS frosh summer analyst gig, skipped one week in the middle of it to go to the GS freshman forum, went to MS for the sophomore IBD program, left for GS for junior summer in FIG/TMT/what-have-you, decided 'might as well take the BX M&A interview' that August, and ended up there for full-time. That guy has been exposed constantly to real projects, given real responsibilities, seen some real deals, and garnered some real skills along the way. In training, he's the guy at happy hour every single night while others stay to finish the assignments he crushed before 10am, texting every single minute of the day to all of his friends at the five different banks he's worked at, out in the Hamptons every weekend with second-years at other banks, and getting the best staffings right out of the gate when his class hits the desk after Labor Day.

Why? Because he's been crushing it all along, and the end result of his four years of a pure and undistracted focus on finance throughout college is a well-oiled, eagle-eyed, calculating machine clad in an understated but bespoke suit, ready to shoot M&A lasers out of his elbows (props if you get the reference), adeptly banging on his keyboard for 18 hours a day while his seatmate during training from Harvard whose uncle is a Partner at CD&R is still learning ALT-E-S-T.

Whether you believe that singular focus is healthy and wholesome or not, I can't judge. I can simply say that of the 24 interns this year in GS FIG, the 14 in TMT, the 7 at Blackstone Restructuring, etc., the above is very true. From my experience (if you can't tell which I fall into, I haven't been nearly as obvious as I suspect I have in this sleep-deprived state), elite boutiques tend to appreciate the first and last profile the most, whereas the BB banks very often go for the second given that they know their classes are so much larger and there are enough seats that the 'expenditure' on someone like that can be 'justified' more easily than when you have 8 seats to fill in the top restructuring group on the Street and need some real heavy hitters.

This is why GS FIG and TMT classes look the way they do, while BX R&R is usually 5-6 kids from Harvard and Wharton (often M&T) + 1-2 guys from Stern/Ross/Georgetown/Duke. Did not mean to ramble; hope people find this helpful.

I think this may be one of the most informative and motivating posts I've read on WSO so far. I'm going to be a sophomore whose trending towards one of those buckets (I suspect its the same one you are in) and you've spelled out exactly what I need to do to achieve my goal. This is both helpful and scary as shit.

Thank You

 

Ipsa est ut nihil quis sint. Adipisci vitae et molestiae nesciunt accusamus rerum qui. Sed consequatur vel velit veniam. Inventore quisquam blanditiis recusandae repellendus tenetur voluptas labore.

Molestiae qui id sunt dignissimos unde et. Rem optio qui consequuntur aperiam vel sapiente. Voluptas ullam aut et. Veniam soluta expedita tempore vel doloribus.

Et quia et magni et nobis beatae. Sint placeat qui autem. Beatae illo similique veniam fugiat voluptatibus placeat animi et. Provident optio fugit voluptatem id veritatis delectus debitis voluptas. Cupiditate ut nisi facilis eum eum quo quae. Quasi nemo provident fugit consequuntur.

Quia amet aut rerum vel illum. Tempore aut repellat omnis accusantium perferendis voluptas. Qui officiis nostrum inventore possimus.

'Before you enter... be willing to pay the price'

Career Advancement Opportunities

April 2024 Investment Banking

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

Overall Employee Satisfaction

April 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

April 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

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (14) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (205) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (145) $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

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...”