Offer: PE FoF or IBD - Any advice?

interested in this too

Whatever you do, make sure you go to a place that's not going to fire you in your first year (or worse, before your first year). The uncertainty you mentioned at the investment bank would make me nervous...

• Capt K

Take whatever's safer at this point. You could do FoF to MBA to PE for instance.

certain FoF also do co-investments which involve some of the responsibilities taken by investment associates at buyout shops.

maybe possible to work with your GPs/LPs, build a network and lateral over to the buyout shop.

when i was interviewing for PE, a couple of the interviewers came over that way.

so if ur firm does co-investments, you may want to look into get into that side as well.

The world has changed. And we must change with it.

Thanks for the responses guys. The FoF does not do co-investments so this is purely a FoF experience.

Just to provide some additional information, I will join the IB as a Graduate for 1 year where my cost is borne by HR, and post 1-year I expect that I will have to fight for a group placement, however the pre-selected team which I am assigned to has made it clear they are unable to take me on due to headcount issues.

Some advice I have been given from individuals: - Snr. Associate in IBD: take the IBD offer as it's good for 1 year - Ivy 4.0: FoF would help with differentiation for bschool admissions

Personally I think I would learn more from the FoF experience, but the uncertainty of FT conversion and paycut are the 2 major sticking points.

I would like to hear the perspective of people in the PE industry - how does FoF experience contrast with IBD, and which would provide stronger exit opps to bschool?

And from people in IBD whom are familiar with group placements post Graduate Programme, would my experience in a particular sector make it difficult for me to be placed in other teams post 1-year?

Much thanks.

For the PE one, it depends on whether it's primary or a secondary experience as they vary greatly...

Its a secondary experience.

I would really like to know simply - is FoF experience considered an upgrade to IBD or is it ranked lower than IBD?

Anyone from the PE industry can comment on this. Thanks

this is definitely a tough call. I worked in IBD and PE but not a FoF so I'm not sure what your day-to-day would be like or what your options would be post. You can always go to b school and try to jump into primary PE but it probably won't be easy from either.

I would also go with whatever position seems more "stable"...tempting to take the IBD bc they basically guaranteed at least 1 year, but that also makes it that much more likely that you are gone after 12 months and back into this tough mkt.

Good luck, patrick

Please help us get to 20,000 members by March 31st and win a free WSO shirt! http://www.printfection.com/wso-store

Contest Info here: //www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/march-to-20000-members-t-shirt-contest

Invite People Here: //www.wallstreetoasis.com/invite

IBD fo sho.

A few things...

In respect to someone mentioning certain FoF hire ex-IBD guys... I don't think this is the case for this particular FoF. Reason being OP mentioned 60% of IBD comp.

First off, no ex-IBD guy will take a 40% hit on his comp; second if the 40% hit is only at analyst level and an ex-IBD would come in as an assoc., this would mean they would get competitive salary to IBD. I find it unlikely a FoF is paying an analyst 84K(60% of 140K which no IB analyst is getting these days anyway) and an associate 250K. This would mean your first 4 years are as follows Analyst1: 84K, Analyst2: 94K, Analyst3: 104K, Assoc1: 250K, even Assoc1: 200K. Highly unlikely. Unless its a very well known company and their comp schedule is also very well known, or it is outlined in writing for you, I'd be skeptical. Typically you find a firms paying competitively at the assoc level will pay competitively at the analyst level as well. I haven't come across many firms paying you a BO salary as an analyst and a FO salary as an associate. I could be wrong.

Also, the MD mentioned they're grooming someone for the Director level? Thats a bunch of recruiting bullshit. No MD decides an analyst is a good fit to become a director over a Superday. Every firm is "grooming" hires for MD positions when they hire you, since they will pick candidates with long-term leadership potential over others.

I did the FoF thing for a bit. And generally speaking, it is VERY VERY seldom transferable to the principal investment area of PE. If you want to get into PE, take the banking job. FoF is notorious for pigeon holing people, once you're there, its very hard to shake the typecast. Plus, you're not learning many transferable skills. You'll possibly learn quantitatively how a PE firm operates, but you can do that by keeping abreast of the market and key players.

Marcus - you convinced me. I vote IBD.

Please help us get to 20,000 members by March 31st and win a free WSO shirt! http://www.printfection.com/wso-store //www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/march-to-20000-members-t-shirt-contest Invite People Here: //www.wallstreetoasis.com/invite

Now that I think about, your FoF is probably just as likely to blow up as your IBD, if not more.

Surely there are more nuances to this question than have been presented? For one, getting an experience from Pantheon, Coller Capital, Paul Capital Partner, or GS PEG at a time like this wouldn't altogether ship-wreck your career. After all, these groups cover the entire umbrella of fund-of-fund investing (primary, secondary LP/GP, co-investments) and in an environment marked by a dearth of primary fund raising, the secondary market is teeming with activity. I believe GS PEG just closed a $6bn vintage fund that buy-up LP interests and synthetic secondaries. Some of these transactions make for great business. If I'm a secondary fund purchasing LPs with guaranteed IRRs of 8-10% at a discount corresponding to 15% IRR, I'm a happy camper. Beats the returns achieved currently by most PE firms, let alone the HF community. Which begets the question: who cares how you make your returns? Investing in pork-bellies or FX might not be the most glamorous gig, but who cares about glamour if your risk-adjusted returns are superior to the most 'sophisticated' of investment strategies.

In short, you'll get transactional experience working for a FoF (provided the fund engages in secondaries and co-investments). Granted the transactions will differ greatly from the kinds you would encounter on the sell-side, and indeed for principal investing. You'll also pick up due-dilligence skills (which job wouldn't impart those skills...) and sourcing for investment opportunities, be they primary, secondary, or co-investments.

But on a different note. I'm a smidge peeved by the arrogance exhibited by some members of this forum. While I do not work for a FoF, I can at least respect their business thesis (at least for the PE asset class). As Marcus points out, yes, you may be typecast working for a PE FoF, but by whom? Industry professionals? Unlikely. By your peers? More likely. Why? Because they have been inculcated with the belief that the traditional route into PE is through either IB/Consulting. And that makes sense. There are far more analysts in IB/Consulting versus, say, fund management.

At the end of the day, my advice (whichever gig you choose) is: work hard. Don't feel entitled. Working for a PE FoF might land you an interview. So might the IB gig. At that stage it is up to you to convince your prospective employers why your experience at the FoF (or IB) uniquely equips you to add value to the firm.

i don't know enough to comment on most of what uff said, but the last paragraph is frameable.

[quote=Marcus]I did the FoF thing for a bit. And generally speaking, it is VERY VERY seldom transferable to the principal investment area of PE.[\quote]

Out of interest, what job did you lateral into after your FoF stint?

Uff, perfectly said.... Your post reminds me of a saying and reasoning by michael milken, he said: he didn't do junk bonds because they were glorious, M&A was glorious at that time, he did junk bonds because no one else wanted to door and he could profit... And he did it gloriously cashing out a $500m bonus in the '80s...