Hi all,
There have been attempts before to have a discussion on which are the best LevFin teams in London, but those threads have not got that far. This is another attempt.
And I am not asking about deal volume/value, I am asking about analyst experience and perceived exit opps to credit shops & PE (so for example the fact that FS does most of the FS-related LevFin work in a given bank, not the LevFin team should be factored in).
Half-random guess to get this conversation going:
Tier 1
BAML, DB, CS, JPM, Citi
Tier 2
HSBC, BNP, GS, MS, Barclays, ING, RBS, Credit Agricole
Tier 3
SocGen, UniCredit, UBS, Commerzbank
Many thanks,
I thought GS LevFin was the most prestigious levfin group?
Not sure about BAML and Citi but JPM / CS / DB are the strongest LevFin teams in LDN
Fully agreed. DB was a favorite among HH for distressed hedge funds for a long time.
As someone currently working in US LevFin, below is my view in terms of EU LevFin deal flow (in no particular order):
Top 1-5: DB (clear #1) then, GS, Barclays, Citi, JPM Top 5-10: BNP, BAML (although has been on the rise), CS, HSBC, MS
Just keep in mind that in Europe, the leveraged finance capital markets is relatively a lot smaller than the US (about 3-4x smaller), so in terms of deal flow, it will pale in comparison to your US counterparts.
Many thanks for the answers. Any views on tier 3/4 teams as well? Or is there a sharp cut-off point after the TOP10 names where you could say it doesn't make sense to join the LevFin team as the work done there changes significantly (meaning no lead left positions and only underwriting)?
Bump
do the tier 2 banks also have good exit opps, or just tier 1?
CS is def one of the tops. JPM, BAML and Deutsche too.
Not GS?
it is a notch below the ones I mentioned.
I know Jefferies London LevFin has had some decent exits recently -- oaktree, EQT, Saudi Arabia SWF. Can be ranked somewhere in Tier 3 for exit opps but obviously don't do as much volume.
Bump. Perhaps someone could still add a bit on the tier 3/4 LevFin teams? Thanks
Tier 1: DB/CS/JP/ML Tier 2: UK commercial banks (Barclays, HSBC), French commercial banks (BNP, SocGen), GS, Citi Tier 3: Rest...the Commerzbanks, Unicredits, Credit Agricolore, RBS etc etc but these banks are also "good" at loans/lending (little ambition to make returns on those products...). Would throw MS and UBS into that bucket too...they aren't great in this space (good in acquisition financing but little to no loans business and outsource their modelling).
Note that there are huge gaps between T1, 2 and 3 (particularly between 1 and 2) given that Lead Left/Physical Bookrunners are a thing as these bookrunners take the lion share of the fees home...it's literally a success-begets-success business and its hard go break into the T1 bucket.
Also a lot of the banks have thrown LevFin together with Sponsors and even together with IG DCM whereby particularly the latter is a completely different ball game (lending crucial so all the commercial banks are essentially T1...)
Very informative comment, many thanks. To probe a bit further, what are the main differences between T1 and T2 when it comes to the work done - does the fact that you are not in a team that is usually lead left mean that what you do is to analyse if your bank would like to be a joint arranger? Is the work done then significantly less technical? Or to ask in another way, if one wants to go to a distressed debt / credit fund post-IB, would it makes sense: 1. Top RX groups 2. Top LevFin groups (T1 as you define) 3. Top M&A groups 4. T2/T3 M&A (as even if you are T2 M&A, you will be doing proper analysis on your own and have client contact, which does not seem to be the case that much in T2/T3 LevFin) 5. T2/T3 LevFin
Thanks,
I saw a lot of ppl. with amazing exits from CS LevFin junior background. So as others already mentioned, it is one of the top places to be. Not sure about Citi and BAML in EMEA
Yea CS LevFin/Sponsors is for sure one of the top groups in EMEA
Very informative comment, many thanks. To probe a bit further, what are the main differences between T1 and T2 when it comes to the work done - does the fact that you are not in a team that is usually lead left mean that what you do is to analyse if your bank would like to be a joint arranger? Is the work done then significantly less technical? Or to ask in another way, if one wants to go to a distressed debt / credit fund post-IB, would it makes sense: 1. Top RX groups 2. Top LevFin groups (T1 as you define) 3. Top M&A groups 4. T2/T3 M&A (as even if you are T2 M&A, you will be doing proper analysis on your own and have client contact, which does not seem to be the case that much in T2/T3 LevFin) 5. T2/T3 LevFin
Thanks,
If you're not lead left, or an MLA taking a serious commitment--you're effectively preparing an internal credit application to ensure your bank has the ability to commit to the deal. Therefore, the analyst experience at BAML, will be very different than the analyst experience at Mizuho. For example, BAML (as an entity) will be heavily involved in syndication strategy, pricing, structuring and documentation. Mizuho will not be involved in any of that (other than for box ticking the credit application). BAML will be very client facing, likely in contact with the sponsor/borrower multiple times a day. On the other hand, Mizuho will probably speak to the sponsor twice throughout the entire deal. Once to originally commit to the deal and second for a principal discussion to get Mizuho comfortable with some point on its credit application.
Its also worth noting that in lev fin, T2 and T3 are not interchangeable. There is a huge difference between HSBC and Commerzbank. HSBC still runs deals and takes huge commitments. Commerzbank, at best, will hold some of the RCF and look to provide some ancillary LC, FX, etc services. Its probably better to conceptualise the difference between T1 and T2 by prestige and deal quality. For that reason, I would probably move UniCredit and RBS up to T2 as the former is heavily involved in Italian PE (which is very hot at the moment) and the latter has historically been big in lev fin due to its balance sheet. The difference then between T2 and T3 is whether you'll ever see the left side of the OM/top of the facility agreement and therefore be involved in syndication strategy, pricing, structuring and documentation. I largely agree with mxp's division amongst tiers.
In terms of what you should prioritise to obtain a role in distressed investing or credit funds, its important to consider the strategy you'd like to work in. For example, if you're looking at a credit fund that does direct lending and long term holds on leveraged loans you should prioritise 2, 4, and 5. M&A will give you some prestige in terms of the name behind you, but not the same skills. Sell side M&A and leveraged really are very different things (particularly generic corporate sell side M&A). I think this forum sometimes generically jumps to "modelling skills>everything else". But its important to realise there is something to be said for understanding the intricacies of the loan world which you can't pickup overnight....
If you're looking for distressed/special sits strategies, then I'd say your order is about right.
Bump
Seems like all of the above is based on rankings for HY bond instruments i.e. If you're looking at european leveraged loans league tables the picture is somehow different with the 4 French banks + UniCredit + a few other (e.g. ING) leading the pack. Note that many of those institutions have decentralized, smaller LevFin teams split on a regional basis (FBe, DACH, Nordics, ItEs, etc.) with only HY (market) teams gathered in London. The levloan market has been on fire in Europe during the last 2 years and as teams are smaller, exposure to top sponsors and experience gained in modelling/doc/deal structuring/syndication are extremely valuable - eg in my institution all the modelling is done in the respective regional LevFin team even if the deal is eventually backed by bonds. PM me in case you'd like more info
Et qui dolor sed necessitatibus quisquam voluptatibus quos porro. Quam praesentium laboriosam illo optio ut nesciunt praesentium. Nulla distinctio consequatur ullam quibusdam aliquid. Fugiat modi non tempora soluta. Ad natus fuga cum non.
Voluptatum sunt eum ratione molestias earum incidunt qui. Optio qui eligendi impedit rem aut. Voluptas a veritatis quis magnam tempora. Corrupti facilis vero ut soluta enim quaerat sunt est. Assumenda fugit magnam saepe minima et temporibus. Quia occaecati eos sit repellat quis labore qui. Sunt quibusdam rem assumenda placeat aliquid fuga.
Labore est autem alias est. Libero illo sequi quod accusamus vero vero occaecati. Et quasi numquam quia architecto eaque.
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...
Aut recusandae consequuntur eum officiis. Odit incidunt sed sequi. Voluptates natus labore rerum nulla omnis quis quam.
Labore voluptatem accusamus consequatur et. Enim quasi est numquam aperiam quasi nesciunt iusto. Omnis magnam quia qui reprehenderit ut provident incidunt. Minima delectus necessitatibus quae possimus harum.