Post-MBA PE Recruiting - HBS

I know that HBS is the best place for people recruiting for PE, but what about Stanford, Wharton and Booth? Do any reputable firms reach out to these schools or is HBS the only one that PE wants to recruit from?

 

HBS isnt the best place for post-mba PE recruiting, it is the ONLY place. If you go to any other school your chances of landing a PE gig are ZERO.

Kidding of course. PE recruiting is highly competitive because there are a limited number of positions, highly qualified candidates, and PE shops generally run fairly lean. Prior pre-MBA PE experience is generally essential even coming from H/S/W/Chi/etc. Do a search.

 

My point is that unlike many other occupations such as consulting, banking or corporate, it seems that HBS is by far the best place to do recruiting for PE. When top PE funds recruit MBAs, do they usually target HSW or just H?

 

Ha -- the HBS grads tend to stick with the megafunds? Couldn't be further than the truth. HBS grads are all over the middle market as well -- alongside Stanford and Wharton and to a lesser extent Chicago / Kellogg / Columbia.

CompBanker’s Career Guidance Services: https://www.rossettiadvisors.com/
 

H/S/W all have a lot of PE recruiting (and there's recruiting at Columbia and Chicago, etc, too).

That said, it is true that there are SELECT firms that only recruit from HBS. But there are certain firms that only recruit from Stanford or another school too... it's usually just because they're small, only need 1-2 guys per year, etc... I think this is more common at HFs than PE firms... CERTAINLY megafunds need to big up people from more than just HBS.

 

STIBOR - i think you're right. It will be even tougher for you than for people with IB experience only. Unfortunately, the PE recruiting is just very dependent on prior experience due to the heavy supply imbalance. You will likely have much better chances of getting a public market investing gig out of Columbia - check out their value investing offering.

 
madison383:
STIBOR - i think you're right. It will be even tougher for you than for people with IB experience only. Unfortunately, the PE recruiting is just very dependent on prior experience due to the heavy supply imbalance. You will likely have much better chances of getting a public market investing gig out of Columbia - check out their value investing offering.
What is your status now? Are you at or have you attended a top b-school? If so, what are your thoughts on hedge fund recruiting generally? Am I decently positioned there? Again, I have a cool/front-office job at a decent hedge fund now just for context.
 

I attend a top MBA program and there is so much competition for full-time positions that you pretty much have to have PE experience just to even get an interview. I think the last paragraph is very key:

"Important thing is to remember that you don't want to compete for any post-MBA positions - better to have a unique skillset or source it by yourself (or through personal network). Professors usually have good relationships with PE firms that they use once you get to school (if they like you)."

I wouldn't gauge full-time opportunities by the number of summer opportunities.

 
ERWB:
I attend a top MBA program and there is so much competition for full-time positions that you pretty much have to have PE experience just to even get an interview. I think the last paragraph is very key:

"Important thing is to remember that you don't want to compete for any post-MBA positions - better to have a unique skillset or source it by yourself (or through personal network). Professors usually have good relationships with PE firms that they use once you get to school (if they like you)."

I wouldn't gauge full-time opportunities by the number of summer opportunities.

ERWB - "what are your thoughts on hedge fund recruiting generally? Am I decently positioned there? Again, I have a cool/front-office job at a decent hedge fund now just for context." How did people land HF jobs at your school?

 
ERWB:
I wouldn't gauge full-time opportunities by the number of summer opportunities.

This is a very good point.

Also consider that even though the 'capital overhang' may be dwindling, the fundraising environment is about as brutal as anyone could imagine. Anecdotally, from what I've seen and heard lately, funds that have experienced some excellent returns are ending up over subscribed, while not-so-great funds struggle to raise money. Obvious that seems like common sense, but it seems that even 'average' and 'above average' funds are having a rough go.

Point is, that may translate into a significant lag for hiring as PEGs finish out their current funds and spend longer than anticipated raising their next one.

Regards

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant, it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan
 

Agreed on the fundraising environment. I guess my take was that having seen the data on past fundraising cyclicality, I feel that in a couple years fundraising will be a bit easier than it is currently. Part of this reasoning is that depending on future interest rates, and given the current pension deficits etc., LPs will have to continue allocating equal or greater amounts. The # of GPs will likely shrink, and the currently successful funds will likely be raising larger funds in the future ...

 
Best Response
madison383:
Agreed on the fundraising environment. I guess my take was that having seen the data on past fundraising cyclicality, I feel that in a couple years fundraising will be a bit easier than it is currently. Part of this reasoning is that depending on future interest rates, and given the current pension deficits etc., LPs will have to continue allocating equal or greater amounts. The # of GPs will likely shrink, and the currently successful funds will likely be raising larger funds in the future ...

Yeah, that's all very possible. A big factor is going to be where the economy is. If it isn't back and in full swing, the PE world is going to stay depressed. With the tough fundraising environment some firms just won't risk putting up a zero on a risky investment. What has happened over the last few years, in my world, is that funds have started to move down stream and find smaller deals than they would have looked at before. Issue there is you have to do more smaller deals to deploy that same amount of capital...so raising a larger fund becomes an even bigger headache because of how many deals you have to do.

And part of the fundraising problem, from what I've seen, is over allocation to the asset class.

Clearly all of that could change depending on a number of economic factors...so it should be an interesting ride.

Regards

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant, it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan
 

STIBOR - yup at a top-mba. You will have a better shot at HF recruiting. However, even that is pretty competitive. If you are already in a research role at a HF - then you're better off staying and networking on your own. It is not clear to me that you will benefit from bschool.

 
madison383:
STIBOR - yup at a top-mba. You will have a better shot at HF recruiting. However, even that is pretty competitive. If you are already in a research role at a HF - then you're better off staying and networking on your own. It is not clear to me that you will benefit from bschool.
I posted earlier about my personal situation so no need to relive that, but for me B-school is fun/networking/pedigree (I went to a non-UCB/UCLA state school in Cali). Also my current fund is in slow-growth mode and not doing super exciting things so I could transition to something better potentially, and also not worry about being unemployed if things went south here.
 

As a fairly recent HSW grad, I would definitely agree with and emphasize the above statements about needing prior PE/VC experience in order to get a post-MBA position in the field. I think there's a lot of misconception out there that just simply going to a top-tier bschool will put you in the running for good buyside role. FYI: this is for pretty much ALL private equity positions, not just megafund or tier 1 shops.

However, based on my observations I have seen exceptions to the scenario occur in a couple of cases that should be brought out.

1) Foreign Background - Several of my classmates with zero buyside experience and have, at best, semi-relevant skill-sets to PE have found positions because they have strong knowledge/network/background/foreign language proficiency in "hot' emerging market locales.

2) Deep Specific Industry Expertise - If you have a strong background in an "in-demand" area or a very unique skill-set then you could make the jump. This applies a little more to VC than PE, though I've seen it happen in PE too. For example, a classmate of mine had 6 years working as an engineer in the clean-tech area so he found work with a clean-tech fund. Likewise, a classmate of mine who was a medical doctor who went back to get a MBA found work with a VC.

There actually is a third group and that's those with signficant finance experience (usually Investment Banking at the VP level or higher). However, I don't include them because I don't think their getting an MBA was a significant asset in helping them to move over to PE as they probably could've done so without the b-school degree.

Now all of this isn't to say those at top MBA programs aspire to move into PE/VC are doomed if they don't have prior experience or fit into one of the above circumstances. It's just probably going to happen right away and be one of those longer-term goals.

 
23mich:
As a fairly recent HSW grad, I would definitely agree with and emphasize the above statements about needing prior PE/VC experience in order to get a post-MBA position in the field. I think there's a lot of misconception out there that just simply going to a top-tier bschool will put you in the running for good buyside role. FYI: this is for pretty much ALL private equity positions, not just megafund or tier 1 shops.

However, based on my observations I have seen exceptions to the scenario occur in a couple of cases that should be brought out.

1) Foreign Background - Several of my classmates with zero buyside experience and have, at best, semi-relevant skill-sets to PE have found positions because they have strong knowledge/network/background/foreign language proficiency in "hot' emerging market locales.

2) Deep Specific Industry Expertise - If you have a strong background in an "in-demand" area or a very unique skill-set then you could make the jump. This applies a little more to VC than PE, though I've seen it happen in PE too. For example, a classmate of mine had 6 years working as an engineer in the clean-tech area so he found work with a clean-tech fund. Likewise, a classmate of mine who was a medical doctor who went back to get a MBA found work with a VC.

There actually is a third group and that's those with signficant finance experience (usually Investment Banking at the VP level or higher). However, I don't include them because I don't think their getting an MBA was a significant asset in helping them to move over to PE as they probably could've done so without the b-school degree.

Now all of this isn't to say those at top MBA programs aspire to move into PE/VC are doomed if they don't have prior experience or fit into one of the above circumstances. It's just probably going to happen right away and be one of those longer-term goals.

Regarding no. 2, does it matter what med school you went too?

Array
 

Sit impedit laborum ratione quam sint numquam illum. Ratione ea nemo facilis et illo pariatur. Aut consectetur et quaerat culpa omnis.

Laudantium eius eligendi laboriosam sint eaque quo odio maiores. Assumenda quisquam dolorem asperiores facere veniam. Sint quis animi culpa. Modi iste impedit praesentium enim. Non quia voluptatum modi quia et voluptatum enim.

Nisi asperiores iste et. Repellendus delectus rem non voluptatibus pariatur et sapiente reiciendis. Voluptatum architecto exercitationem est et. Cumque qui sed labore quasi aut.

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Private Equity

  • The Riverside Company 99.5%
  • Warburg Pincus 99.0%
  • Blackstone Group 98.4%
  • KKR (Kohlberg Kravis Roberts) 97.9%
  • Bain Capital 97.4%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Private Equity

  • The Riverside Company 99.5%
  • Blackstone Group 98.9%
  • KKR (Kohlberg Kravis Roberts) 98.4%
  • Ardian 97.9%
  • Bain Capital 97.4%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Private Equity

  • The Riverside Company 99.5%
  • Bain Capital 99.0%
  • Blackstone Group 98.4%
  • Warburg Pincus 97.9%
  • Starwood Capital Group 97.4%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Private Equity

  • Principal (9) $653
  • Director/MD (21) $586
  • Vice President (92) $362
  • 3rd+ Year Associate (89) $280
  • 2nd Year Associate (204) $268
  • 1st Year Associate (386) $229
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (28) $157
  • 2nd Year Analyst (83) $134
  • 1st Year Analyst (246) $122
  • Intern/Summer Associate (32) $82
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (313) $59
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...”