Investment Consulting vs PB/PWM: Which has better exit opps, better regarded
Hi there,
I am currently looking at a few offers for this upcoming year and I think they're all great opportunities. Personally, if I were to stay within finance as a long term career, I would be interested in being in a sales or fundraising type of role, with a strong aspect of relationship management. Also definitely looking to get my MBA a few years down the line, and I have heard that Investment Consulting has very good MBA placement.
At the moment, I have the impression that IC is better regarded in the industry compared to PB, and also presents better exit opps and valuable finance exposure, particularly within the fields I would like to break into such as fundraising and private placement.
I am aware PB gets a fair amount of bashing on this forum, but I am wondering if I am missing something and should consider starting off in PB?
Thank you all for the help!
Interested.
Given your two options, if you ultimately want to spend your time with institutional money then yes, you should do IC. It gets you good interaction with fund managers and you'll be doing relevant work, but if you still have the option to, I'd encourage you to look for a position on the buyside as a sales analyst or something like that. IC can get you in, but you still have to spend some significant time networking, and being patient. Unless you really know the firm well, when a firm is looking for someone to hire, it's probably first internal, then external doing sales already and then finally someone from IC... so I wouldn't say you should expect that IC = open door to relationship management/sales. You're going to have some stiff competition regardless. The other option is to go and do consultant relationship management on the buyside, which isn't sales but is keeping the IC happy and getting your products in the door. I'd say you have better odds at that than institutional sales from IC but again, still not easy.
IC to MBA to buyside isn't a bad way to go either, though I can't really comment on the attractiveness of IC to a top MBA program. If you want to do alts fundraising at a PE or HF I think that's even more difficult and I doubt that IC alone would be enough to get you there and I'm not sure how good B School recruiting would be for that.
Ultimately, I think starting on the buyside is your best bet, though IC could give you some options but you'll have to be thinking about your next few steps and how to get there.
Hi saxxyman, Thank you very much for your reply. Just to clarify, would you completely rule out Private Banking at this point, particularly if I would like to get into alts fundraising or AM sales?
I actually do have an offer for sales at a decent AM, although I feel as though I may be pigeonholed into doing just that, whereas IC provides broad exposure.
I'm not as familiar with the PB/PWM world, so I can't really comment on how flexible that career option is, but I would lean toward saying IC is better particularly assuming that the skillset for institutional versus pwm/pb is slightly different (in that PWM/PB ends up doing more than just investing including taxes, planning, etc.)
Yes, I understand your thought on being 'pigeon holed' but getting into the buyside isn't an easy option either. I'd say it's easier to go buyside -> IC than the reverse so consider that when making a decision...
Which is more prestigious: investment consulting vs private bank (Originally Posted: 11/07/2016)
Hey, I've seen a similar thread discussed before, though I want to specifically ask a question regarding exit opps and career trajectory.
I go to a southern target, and have an option to join Cambridge Associates in their VA office or Merrill lynch for PB.
I one day want to exit to PE/HF fundraising, or potentially AM sales.
I really like the work Cambridge does, and from what I gather they're tops in the IC industry. I would get exposure to PE and HF from a fundraising perspective, although it seems as though private banking also invests in alternatives.
Any advice is helpful!
I have a similar background and just entered year 3 in PB/PWM (2 firms). To answer your question, It really depends on what your role is at each.
If you join a PB/PWM team that is truly focusing on UHNW clients and is growing the business, you will be getting calls from a lot of the biz dev. teams at PE and HFs. Which will give you a ton of face to face time and help develop the relationships. You in turn become sales guys for the fund to your clients. So would argue that the skills are extremely transferable. This is a fairly easy transition and have seen friends / coworkers do it.
In regards to Cambrdige, they are a very strong brand the IC space but would look for clarity on your role. From what I remember they window dressed some of their entry level positions. I had one interview and remembered it being more "operational" than the description positioned it. Without much knowledge of how Cambridge focuses, I do not want to speculate on exit ops.
Would take which ever role gives you the ability to stay in front / in contact with someone in a seat you want to one day be in.
Hey jump, thanks very much for your reply. I am aware Cambridge also offers more operational entry-level roles, however this is for their front office role, "Investment Associate," which they fill with their target schools from the area, primarily Dartmouth, Gtown, Duke and UVA.
I really appreciate your perspective on the transition to PE business dev from PWM, and I feel as though that also seems like a natural transition from IC, particularly at a place like Cambridge where you get face time with some of these managers pitching their fund.
In addition to getting into PE fundraising/business dev, I'm also looking forward to B school and want to make sure I have the best shot.
echo what the other guy said. if you want to go into sales, PWM is great, but again it depends on your role.
also, Merrill's alternative investment platform is not the best. if you want to get familiar with PE fundraising at a PWM firm you'd be better served at MS or GS. so from that perspective, Cambridge could be the way to go.
knowing it's a non-operational role, i would take that if it's just a normal sized team at ML. If you have an offer to join a 1-2b+ aum team in PBIG that has plenty of operational support, it could be pretty attractive. That's a similar role I am in with a competitor and have the ability to only focus on research/manage due dillegence/trading.
In regard's to brofessor comment on ml's AI access, I don't think that should affect your decision. If the team is big enough you will be shown deals from the IB and cap intro type of groups. Have worked at two major firms with same team and has been the case at both.
Thank you both for the insight. @JUMP it's interesting that you also do some trading in your role, I wasn't aware of that within the PWM space. In regards to research and manager due diligence, those are two of your main deliverables as an analyst at Cambridge, so cool to see that overlap in PWM.
I'm aware you can get AI exposure in both roles, but at the moment I am leaning more towards IC as they are solely focused on PE, HF, and other alternatives (which can be a drawback for some if you're interested in equities or bonds). People in the industry have also told me the jump from IC to PB/PWM is pretty easy, whereas the reverse may not be as seamless (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong though).
we run some of our own strategies so am the "trader" for those. It is nothing major.
I would take the ic role. 100% correct on transition from ic to pwm vs other way around.
BB PWM or Investment Consulting? (Originally Posted: 04/02/2013)
Hey guys, I'm a freshman at a southeastern school thinking about possibly working in IB one day. I need to decide between a summer internship position at a BB PWM (think CS, UBS, DB) or at Mercer Investment Consulting (real estate group). Any advice on which one would put me in a better position for junior year recruiting? Am I right in assuming the BB PWM is better simply because of brand name?
Mercer would be better.
Both provide investment strategy and asset allocation recommendations to their clients, however Mercer will give you exposure to corporate clients while PWM only works with wealthy individuals for the most part ... so I am leaning towards to Mercer.
Voluptatem voluptatem dolorem modi cupiditate. Illum doloribus quia est ut. Provident ut quis vel eos non.
Et repudiandae facere velit. Velit debitis impedit odio qui non. Aliquid animi ab dicta hic odio. Ut consectetur doloremque quasi qui. Voluptatum sequi eius quis numquam consequatur excepturi.
Quidem repellendus est voluptatem hic optio voluptatem excepturi. Reprehenderit dicta asperiores natus dignissimos facilis velit. Consequatur sapiente laborum aut.
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...