• Sharebar

This is for IBD, not markets, and by "prestige" I mean where graduates seem to want to work most.

1. GS/MS
2. ML/JPM/LEH
3. Laz/Roths
4. Citi/UBS
5. CS/DB
6. ABN/Barclays/Bear
7. BNP/DrKW/HSBC/RBS

Comments (38)

  • godsavethequeen's picture

    Dav3100 i agree on Laz/Roths, I know people who turn down GS/MS for them. I would never put Lehman that far down, their brand equity is strong. Though it does seem like I was wrong on DB. From reading this forum it seems like there is much more emphasis on getting an MBA stateside than in europe...my closest mates in banking went straight from analyst to associate.

  • tallon123's picture

    No offense dav3100 but you aren't even in europe.

    Before I start I just to reiterate that this thread is based on 'where graduates seem to want to work'.

    In oxbridge/lse people respect lazard but there is very little respect for roths.

    People respect db capital markets but there less respect for db ibd - its prestige is below its league tables rank as its been very high in the uk and europe league tables recently.

    Conversely the prestige of lehman ibd is well above its league table position. In general oxbridge/lse students place a premium on BB status.

    For students at oxbridge/lse the ranking goes something like this:

    1.GS/MS
    ----------
    2.ML/LAZ/JPM
    3.CITI/LEH
    4.UBS/CS
    5.DB/ROTH
    ----------
    6.DrKW/ABN/BEAR/HSBC

  • Oconnor's picture

    small potatoe, I think your list is the most accurate so far, particularly in sticking UBS and DB much further up the list. I'd stick JPM and ML in position 2 as well.

    I personally don't see why people are placing Lehman so high, nobody I know was in the slight bit interested in them vs other banks, and I certainly don't follow the BB argument as we are talking about Europe. As for Lazard, Rothschild, etc, tallon123 is definately right in saying most people would choose a BB over them when it came to a final decision (I for one did).

    student22 is neither oxbridge or lse, at least I sincerely hope they don't let in people who make grammatical mistakes like 5 persons (another of his posts).

  • In reply to Oconnor
    dav3100's picture

    Oconnor wrote:

    student22 is neither oxbridge or lse, at least I sincerely hope they don't let in people who make grammatical mistakes like 5 persons (another of his posts).

    Neither Oxbridge NOR LSE. Nothing worse than criticizing someone's grammar while making another grammatical mistake! Although I must admit Student22's was far more flagrant than yours.

  • VermontCheese's picture

    My knowledge of European Bank prestige is very limited, so forgive me if this seems like a dumb question. It seems you are only talking about schools in England. Does this also mean that you're only talking about prestige in England/London or is the prestige the same throughout Europe?

  • EuroMonkey's picture

    A lot of European IBD is based in London, there are only smallish regional offices in other European cities (except for the HQs of non-US/UK banks).

    So a) this has a strong "weighting" effect on prestige at unis throughout Europe, b) a lot of european students want to do IB in London for the same reasons americans want NY.

    Banks will also more sought after with their home country students than other europeans of course.

  • tallon123's picture

    small potatoe your list has several shortcomings:

    1) as already noted it excludes JPM and ML
    2) UBS is placed in the same tier as GS, MS - UBS is most definitely nowhere near these other two banks
    3) ABN>LEH lol!!!
    4) Barcap is not respected for IBD. Yes its capital markets is good, but from what I've heard they have an extremely limited corp fin practice.

  • BABanker's picture

    everybody has their own opinions and each bank has something going for it. If you're really smart, really hard working, and really good, you will be successful in the long run whether you start at Lazard or Lehman or Goldman Sachs.

    Banking is a tough field to get into. Even if you do everything right, you still might not get an offer at a certain bank because you don't "gel" with the interviewer. So before you get all wound up with this kind of "I would work for Merrill Lynch, but I wouldn't work for Rothschild" crap. JUST GET YOUR FOOT IN THE DOOR SOMEWHERE...who cares if it's HSBC or BofA.

    It's ok to have goals and targets, but it's not the end of the world if you don't work at Goldman Sachs. I know plenty of people in great PE and HF gigs out of HSBC, BofA, and the like.

    There's variation in that certain groups might be really, really strong at bank with "lower prestige"...it happens. There are plenty of non-prestige factors that you could argue are more important in choosing the right place for you.

    I know at 20 years old, your analyst job seems like everything to you (I was the same way). It's something tangible and concrete that you can work towards. However, none of you really know what you want 20 years from now, so it's hard to work towards.

    There's a long term, big picture that one day you will see. And you will realize that your first job, while important, is not NEARLY as significant as you are all worrying about.

    Get the best job you can (even if it is not banking), work as hard as you can, learn as much as you, network as much as you can, stay ambitious, and I promise you, you will be fine.