How to choose between exit opps?

oppcostofcapital:

Figure out what you enjoy most about investment banking (what aspects of it) -- and then try to relate that to what you might want to do for the next few years (if not the next 20 years). Buyside jobs are different in that (although a lot of PE programs may be) -- it's not always a 2 years and out deal. Sometimes it's a career track position, and in that case, you should try to narrow down what you actually want to do. The best way to do that from your position is to think about what you like best about your job / finance in general.

Before writing what important criteria to consider are -- all of the above exit opps you listed can provide you with selectivity, desirability, a foundation for a good long term career, compensation, and anything else you'd want from a buyside position. You'll have to judge that yourself when you meet with each firm and try to find one that is a good fit for you on the basis of the criteria, and more importantly, a good fit in terms of how you think you'll be able to work with the other professionals at the fund.

Things to consider beforehand: - Do you like interacting with clients (email / in-person)? PE tends to be more of an interactive job in terms of working with potential targets, bankers, etc. HF tends to be a research driven job at the analyst level and can be more solitary on a daily basis -- although in both cases you'll be working with people and in both cases you'll generally have to do a lot of work by yourself. - Do you love modeling (LBO, for example, quite relevant for PE)? If you love building complicated financial models with scenarios contingent on financing etc -- PE may be better for you. At the entry level, while you'll be modeling in both, you'll probably be doing more valuation / modeling and evaluated on your ability to do so in PE -- whereas in HF, building a good operating model is helpful but generally the investment thesis and your support for your thesis is what's most important. - Do you enjoy thinking about business models and understanding drivers of a variety of businesses? Probably applies to all types of buyside jobs but you'll probably be most responsible for this at a HF as you'll have to look through the public filings of many companies and will be responsible for coming up with a sense for how each business works quickly and in an efficient matter in order to support your thesis. - Do you enjoy thinking more about established companies or new companies (start-ups)? Obviously PE / HF deal with more established companies, generally, while VC deals with earlier companies. - Are you more interested in fundamental analysis or do you like thinking more about macro issues in the global economy? PE / HF / VC will generally focus on fundamental analysis and valuation, whereas macro hf will rely more on macro issues. - Do you thrive more in a place that has an institutional structure / is larger in terms of headcount, or would you prefer to be at a smaller firm? Personal preference for you. - Do you enjoy thinking on the bright side or do you tend to think more about downside situations? If you want to understand how to think about where things go wrong in businesses, credit / distressed HF are definitely places you should consider. - In analyzing a company, would you prefer to have essentially most / all available information provided to you in a data room, or would you prefer to be dealing with limited information coming from a variety of public sources that you'd have to search for yourself? PE and VC (assuming you have signed confidentiality agreements) will generally provide you with all the information you could ever want in terms of making an investment, to a point, whereas HF investments are based on public information.

oppcostofcapital:

Figure out what you enjoy most about investment banking (what aspects of it) -- and then try to relate that to what you might want to do for the next few years (if not the next 20 years). Buyside jobs are different in that (although a lot of PE programs may be) -- it's not always a 2 years and out deal. Sometimes it's a career track position, and in that case, you should try to narrow down what you actually want to do. The best way to do that from your position is to think about what you like best about your job / finance in general.

Before writing what important criteria to consider are -- all of the above exit opps you listed can provide you with selectivity, desirability, a foundation for a good long term career, compensation, and anything else you'd want from a buyside position. You'll have to judge that yourself when you meet with each firm and try to find one that is a good fit for you on the basis of the criteria, and more importantly, a good fit in terms of how you think you'll be able to work with the other professionals at the fund.

Things to consider beforehand: - Do you like interacting with clients (email / in-person)? PE tends to be more of an interactive job in terms of working with potential targets, bankers, etc. HF tends to be a research driven job at the analyst level and can be more solitary on a daily basis -- although in both cases you'll be working with people and in both cases you'll generally have to do a lot of work by yourself. - Do you love modeling (LBO, for example, quite relevant for PE)? If you love building complicated financial models with scenarios contingent on financing etc -- PE may be better for you. At the entry level, while you'll be modeling in both, you'll probably be doing more valuation / modeling and evaluated on your ability to do so in PE -- whereas in HF, building a good operating model is helpful but generally the investment thesis and your support for your thesis is what's most important. - Do you enjoy thinking about business models and understanding drivers of a variety of businesses? Probably applies to all types of buyside jobs but you'll probably be most responsible for this at a HF as you'll have to look through the public filings of many companies and will be responsible for coming up with a sense for how each business works quickly and in an efficient matter in order to support your thesis. - Do you enjoy thinking more about established companies or new companies (start-ups)? Obviously PE / HF deal with more established companies, generally, while VC deals with earlier companies. - Are you more interested in fundamental analysis or do you like thinking more about macro issues in the global economy? PE / HF / VC will generally focus on fundamental analysis and valuation, whereas macro hf will rely more on macro issues. - Do you thrive more in a place that has an institutional structure / is larger in terms of headcount, or would you prefer to be at a smaller firm? Personal preference for you. - Do you enjoy thinking on the bright side or do you tend to think more about downside situations? If you want to understand how to think about where things go wrong in businesses, credit / distressed HF are definitely places you should consider. - In analyzing a company, would you prefer to have essentially most / all available information provided to you in a data room, or would you prefer to be dealing with limited information coming from a variety of public sources that you'd have to search for yourself? PE and VC (assuming you have signed confidentiality agreements) will generally provide you with all the information you could ever want in terms of making an investment, to a point, whereas HF investments are based on public information.

oppcostofcapital:

Figure out what you enjoy most about investment banking (what aspects of it) -- and then try to relate that to what you might want to do for the next few years (if not the next 20 years). Buyside jobs are different in that (although a lot of PE programs may be) -- it's not always a 2 years and out deal. Sometimes it's a career track position, and in that case, you should try to narrow down what you actually want to do. The best way to do that from your position is to think about what you like best about your job / finance in general.

Before writing what important criteria to consider are -- all of the above exit opps you listed can provide you with selectivity, desirability, a foundation for a good long term career, compensation, and anything else you'd want from a buyside position. You'll have to judge that yourself when you meet with each firm and try to find one that is a good fit for you on the basis of the criteria, and more importantly, a good fit in terms of how you think you'll be able to work with the other professionals at the fund.

Things to consider beforehand: - Do you like interacting with clients (email / in-person)? PE tends to be more of an interactive job in terms of working with potential targets, bankers, etc. HF tends to be a research driven job at the analyst level and can be more solitary on a daily basis -- although in both cases you'll be working with people and in both cases you'll generally have to do a lot of work by yourself. - Do you love modeling (LBO, for example, quite relevant for PE)? If you love building complicated financial models with scenarios contingent on financing etc -- PE may be better for you. At the entry level, while you'll be modeling in both, you'll probably be doing more valuation / modeling and evaluated on your ability to do so in PE -- whereas in HF, building a good operating model is helpful but generally the investment thesis and your support for your thesis is what's most important. - Do you enjoy thinking about business models and understanding drivers of a variety of businesses? Probably applies to all types of buyside jobs but you'll probably be most responsible for this at a HF as you'll have to look through the public filings of many companies and will be responsible for coming up with a sense for how each business works quickly and in an efficient matter in order to support your thesis. - Do you enjoy thinking more about established companies or new companies (start-ups)? Obviously PE / HF deal with more established companies, generally, while VC deals with earlier companies. - Are you more interested in fundamental analysis or do you like thinking more about macro issues in the global economy? PE / HF / VC will generally focus on fundamental analysis and valuation, whereas macro hf will rely more on macro issues. - Do you thrive more in a place that has an institutional structure / is larger in terms of headcount, or would you prefer to be at a smaller firm? Personal preference for you. - Do you enjoy thinking on the bright side or do you tend to think more about downside situations? If you want to understand how to think about where things go wrong in businesses, credit / distressed HF are definitely places you should consider. - In analyzing a company, would you prefer to have essentially most / all available information provided to you in a data room, or would you prefer to be dealing with limited information coming from a variety of public sources that you'd have to search for yourself? PE and VC (assuming you have signed confidentiality agreements) will generally provide you with all the information you could ever want in terms of making an investment, to a point, whereas HF investments are based on public information.

+1

oppcostofcapital:

Figure out what you enjoy most about investment banking (what aspects of it) -- and then try to relate that to what you might want to do for the next few years (if not the next 20 years). Buyside jobs are different in that (although a lot of PE programs may be) -- it's not always a 2 years and out deal. Sometimes it's a career track position, and in that case, you should try to narrow down what you actually want to do. The best way to do that from your position is to think about what you like best about your job / finance in general.

Before writing what important criteria to consider are -- all of the above exit opps you listed can provide you with selectivity, desirability, a foundation for a good long term career, compensation, and anything else you'd want from a buyside position. You'll have to judge that yourself when you meet with each firm and try to find one that is a good fit for you on the basis of the criteria, and more importantly, a good fit in terms of how you think you'll be able to work with the other professionals at the fund.

Things to consider beforehand: - Do you like interacting with clients (email / in-person)? PE tends to be more of an interactive job in terms of working with potential targets, bankers, etc. HF tends to be a research driven job at the analyst level and can be more solitary on a daily basis -- although in both cases you'll be working with people and in both cases you'll generally have to do a lot of work by yourself. - Do you love modeling (LBO, for example, quite relevant for PE)? If you love building complicated financial models with scenarios contingent on financing etc -- PE may be better for you. At the entry level, while you'll be modeling in both, you'll probably be doing more valuation / modeling and evaluated on your ability to do so in PE -- whereas in HF, building a good operating model is helpful but generally the investment thesis and your support for your thesis is what's most important. - Do you enjoy thinking about business models and understanding drivers of a variety of businesses? Probably applies to all types of buyside jobs but you'll probably be most responsible for this at a HF as you'll have to look through the public filings of many companies and will be responsible for coming up with a sense for how each business works quickly and in an efficient matter in order to support your thesis. - Do you enjoy thinking more about established companies or new companies (start-ups)? Obviously PE / HF deal with more established companies, generally, while VC deals with earlier companies. - Are you more interested in fundamental analysis or do you like thinking more about macro issues in the global economy? PE / HF / VC will generally focus on fundamental analysis and valuation, whereas macro hf will rely more on macro issues. - Do you thrive more in a place that has an institutional structure / is larger in terms of headcount, or would you prefer to be at a smaller firm? Personal preference for you. - Do you enjoy thinking on the bright side or do you tend to think more about downside situations? If you want to understand how to think about where things go wrong in businesses, credit / distressed HF are definitely places you should consider. - In analyzing a company, would you prefer to have essentially most / all available information provided to you in a data room, or would you prefer to be dealing with limited information coming from a variety of public sources that you'd have to search for yourself? PE and VC (assuming you have signed confidentiality agreements) will generally provide you with all the information you could ever want in terms of making an investment, to a point, whereas HF investments are based on public information.

This is focussed on the content of the job. You should consider are you the person who cares about the brand name? Do you feel happy that you can tell people you are at KKR type of shop and feel it is a personal achievement to end up there ? Or are you happy at a smaller entrepeneurial no name shop? This counts both for the HF/PE world. From small no name PE it will be difficult to get to KKR in the long run for instance.