Best groups at Credit Suisse (New York)

I used the search function, but a lot of threads are outdated, like pre-recession shit.

Anyway, what are the TOP groups at Credit Suisse in NYC only?

Is their TMT group in NYC any good? M&A? I know Sponsors is one of their top groups, but what else?

 
Best Response
orangebull:

Their Sponsors group used to be the best on the street but now it's more like #3 overall behind JPM and DB (imo). M&A, like Sponsors, has been good historically but isn't that hot right now. Either way - stick with these two and Industrials at CS NY. Otherwise you're going to get mediocre deal flow.

Dunno if Energy/Oil & Gas/Natural Resources/whatever CS calls it is run out of NY, but it's #1/#2 right now, and their Houston office is excellent. Healthcare is very solid, though the hours are apparently terrible. Again, don't know about the NY team.

If you're doing Sponsors at CS, I think you'd want to be in their LA office.

 
orangebull:

Their Sponsors group used to be the best on the street but now it's more like #3 overall behind JPM and DB (imo). M&A, like Sponsors, has been good historically but isn't that hot right now. Either way - stick with these two and Industrials at CS NY. Otherwise you're going to get mediocre deal flow.

Lol DB? Are you serious?
 

Second that - considering Sponsors (NYC or LA - is one better than another?), M&A, Power & Renewables, and SF Tech (how do they stack up against Goldman/MS - they are purportedly in consideration to lead Alibaba. com and Box's IPOs, and they also co-led MKTO and some other big IPOs and M&A deals last year). Any tips appreciated.

Long V, MA, AXP, DOGE.
 
kidflash:

Could you expand on this?

I know multiple people at CS M&A, and they told me that they do all the modeling for CS's M&A transactions. Shouldn't M&A by default have the strongest experience?

CS M&A does most of the modeling, but some groups do all their modeling in house. I know of 2 specifically that do so and those groups are both sweatshops as a result.

"Look, you're my best friend, so don't take this the wrong way. In twenty years, if you're still livin' here, comin' over to my house to watch the Patriots games, still workin' construction, I'll fuckin' kill you. That's not a threat, that's a fact.
 

Met with analysts from CS Financial Sponsors and CS Hedge Fund IB group (yes, a vertical within financial sponsors) and they were very fond of their experience thus far. Great deal flow, great culture. And if you look at league tables, CS Fin Sponsors is as good as it gets.

 

I've heard Sponsors is the strongest group, and there are differences between offices. NY and LA are the only ones worth considering, and they don't work together much. LA does full execution on west coast, and do everything for all west coast shops (S.F. PE included) and places very well. NY does east coast, and work with more national PE shops. Honestly can't go wrong with either, but if you're thinking sponsors and want to go to PE, LA has a much better ratio.

 

Morgan Stanley was on the left, Credit Suisse was on the right. I've seen the dealtoy.

Credit Suisse still has a strong tech group but the glory days of Quattrone & co are over. Since people seem to be interested in the MS/CS split on the GOOG IPO, it would be useful to note that there is probably a lot of overlap between CS and MS tech bankers, as Quattrone was originally an MS tech banker.

 

CS Sponsors, Lat America, tech & Energy are more like top 2 groups on the street.

Besides that other strong groups are Industrials (top on the street in Aerospace/Defense and Paper/Packaging), M&A and Lev Fin. Not too sure about M&T, Healthcare, Consumer/retail and others.

 

Hahahaha somebody works at CS! If we took your word for it, they'd have more top groups than Goldman! The only top flight group at CS is Sponsors, and this has been discussed on this board ad nauseam. The rest simply wallow in mediocrity. Now, if you're talking about the '80's and '90's, then yes CSFB used to be a powerhouse, but those days are but are but a vestigial memory now as CS has fallen woefully behind much of the bulge bracket.

 
wildwestderivative:
Hahahaha somebody works at CS! If we took your word for it, they'd have more top groups than Goldman! The only top flight group at CS is Sponsors, and this has been discussed on this board ad nauseam. The rest simply wallow in mediocrity. Now, if you're talking about the '80's and '90's, then yes CSFB used to be a powerhouse, but those days are but are but a vestigial memory now as CS has fallen woefully behind much of the bulge bracket.

Uhm, pay more attention to how the OP phrased his question. He is not asking which groups at CS are top of the street groups. He is asking, out of all the groups at CS, which would you rank as the top 5 within the company.

You see, even if we were talking about a middle market bank that ranks 20th in terms of deal flow for every one of their groups, you can still rank the groups within the bank and compile a list of top 5 groups within the bank.

And to the person who saw the google deal toy, what was it (curiosity)? Was it just their logo?

 

Of course a CS person would say that their group is the best. The reality is that the only "top of the street" (if you could ever really say such a thing) group at CS is their Sponsors group. The energy group at Lehman is widely recognized as the best in the energy space, closely followed by GS and MS. CS Energy is most assuredly not the top energy group on the street, and the only people who would tell you that are probably from CS.

 

CS tech though has been and is regularly neck-and-neck for top of the Street, even post Quatrone; run an extremely lively M&A (distinct from the M&A dept) and IPO practice. GS and MS are the only other contenders, MS doing similar good regular business and GS getting the edge through some infrequent, massive deals. MS and CS tech IPOs do pretty well post-offering, GS ones tend to be quite a bit more scatter-shot (though not as bad as, let's say, Citi and their miserable stinkers).

As for other CS groups mentioned by zardari: M&T, not sure. Definitely doesn't touch GS's TMT Healthcare, not particularly good, if only because I hear the culture is utterly demoralizing Consumer/retail, quite poor. Lehman bought out the formerly very powerful CS group a few years back, so they're rebuilding FIG, no clue

Energy definitely has to go to Lehman, no doubt.

 

Or, you do it by only including deals between 500mm and 2bn, excluding transactions where the targets CFO has red hair

"They are all former investment bankers that were laid off in the economic collapse that Nancy Pelosi caused. They have no marketable skills, but by God they work hard."
 

Agree M&A is one of the better groups at CS but I know their M&A had some major restructuring recently (lots of layoffs) after avoiding layoffs for a few years. You'll definitely learn the most in M&A.

Other good groups are industrials and LatAm. CS does more LatAm deals than any other bulge but its not a group to take if you are not from Brazil or other LatAm country .

Healthcare and real estate at CS are very weak and consumer/retail and FIG are so so. TMT (they combined tech and MT few years ago) used to be solid but not any more.

I think the power group in NY is pretty good and so is lev fin.

 

I agree that M&A has gone through a lot of cuts but CS is still near top of the Street. The top talent is still there. For someone joining as an analyst, I don't think all the noise around it matters and it's still probably one of the top 2 or 3 group to join there.

Tech and FIG have seen a lot of upheaval in the ranks recently and have missed out on some big deals. Energy has been doing very well.

 

Like all BBs, M&A is a great place to be.

Sponsors is historically CS's strongest group.

TMT and healthcare have great people/cultures but not sure about deal flow.

"They are all former investment bankers that were laid off in the economic collapse that Nancy Pelosi caused. They have no marketable skills, but by God they work hard."
 

GIS is now two groups- basic materials (like chemicals, metals/mining, lumber, etc) and the other group's name is escaping me but it is basically general industries like aerospace, automotive, etc.

I'd say historically sponsors, M&A, energy, and tech are the best groups, but if you do tech do not do it in NYC (that's in general as well, excepting GS TMT).

 

A lot of work on restructuring, managing issues for portfolio companies, working on exchange offers, etc. etc. There is also a good amount of pitching involving equity investments rather than outright buyouts, but not much execution there. Still things going on, but nowhere near as busy as they were from 05-07. Group has good relationships with the megafunds, particularly Blackstone.

 

So, in terms of being the best positioned after two years at the firm (and my best positioned I mean in regard to moving to PE, Hedge Fund, Graduate School etc), you would still rank sponsors first at CS (over M&A and energy)?

 

If you want to go into PE, Sponsors or M&A will both be great. M&A will get more dealflow but Sponsors you will get a lot more contact with the megafund PE shops. If you want to go coverage, energy is easily the best coverage group in NY, and the culture is great from all I have heard. Any three of those would get you any/all the opportunities you could ask for.

Honestly, it comes down to fit. The better you fit in with a group, the better you are going to end up doing, and the more your senior people will push for you when headhunters and their PE shop counterparts ask for recommendations.

 

I thought that HC group was sub-par at CS. The only reason they were given the HCA fairness deal was because they along with MS were one of the few banks that had no prior relationships with the company. Their M&A group basically executed the entire deal anyways. Do you have any previous exposure to the HC group?

 

Well considering that this board thinks that the LA office, Sponsors, Tech, and Energy are either 1,2,or 3 in reankings , why isn't the bank fully recognized and recovered from the quattrone years?

I mean most people wouldn't even consider CS in the next category of top BBs after GS/MS. It's usually considered below Lehman/JPM when Lehman has only done well for the past year and half.

 

the offices are ex-DLJ guys and mix of older CS guys. CS was one of the top banks in the 90's and DLJ was probably the best...as good as or just a notch below GS. The head of UBS LA and Investment Bank in US, Ken Moellis is a DLJ guy.

I know that CS and UBS have approxmiately 60-65 bankers and GS is fairly big also with 40 bankers.

 

I think the reason is because it's so easy to compare CS to UBS as an organization, since they are both HQ'ed in Switzerland, have giant PWM operations in Europe, and hover around each other in the league tables (#4-8 in any given quarter). If you compare them as a firm, these past few years UBS has garnered a rep as being an extremely lean bank that's hungry and on the rise. CS is seen as bloated (i.e. several hiring freezes in the past few years and a recent initiative to curb spending and costs).

But if you look at individual groups, CS is doing extremely well. #1 in ECM globally, and their sponsors/lev fin groups are top notch, as well. Look at them on a regional basis: top 3 shop in LA and Chicago. So I guess it all comes down to who is perceived to have the most momentum. As UBS' operations in general are quite smaller than almost all the BB's, they are seen as rising faster.

EDIT: Also consider that similar firms are constantly being gauged against one another (i.e. Citi vs. JPM, MS vs. GS, all the Euro banks, etc.).

 

UBS is very very lean. Deal flow / banker is pretty phenomenal comparatively. CS has a lot of high powered groups and the DLJ sponsors bankers are excellent.

To answer the questions about UBS and CS LA - they have more around 70-75 bankers each and Yes they are very much the remnants of the DLJ LA office and DBL from the 80's.

 

I personally don't think a hiring freeze is the correct solution for CS. In a business that is so relationship oriented, human capital is the most important factor of all. If the company is bloated, that means there has to be non-performers. Get rid of them but continue to hire new talent.

UBS understood this when they hired Moelis and gaurunteed him a multi-million dollar package over multiple years. They recognized talent and weren't afraid to pay up for it (and I think they recognized the fallout Moelis would produce among his underlings at DLJ from CS).

That being said, I think most of the problem with excess fat is in NYC, not the satellite offices.

 

I've heard that they do like more revenues than Evercore out of 75 people in that office. That equates to some 30% or more of UBS IBD's revenues.

Back when it was DLJ LA - Tony James (Pres of Blackstone now, but formerly used to run DLJ) has a famous quote about DLJ LA having larger revenues than all of Paine Webber putting that in the 400mm range). Imagine what that number would be for hte current UBS LA office in today's economy (could easily be 500+).

I actualy heard this numerous times going through the recruiting process with UBS LA. I also heard it during the goldman recruiting process with some analysts that spent a summer at UBS LA.

 

UBS and CS LA guys do something like 3x deal / banker of NY and that's why all their analyst complain that they have the same bonus spread.

I think UBS LA / Chicago have freedom to go higher with the number of 'top bucket' analysts, but I have friends at CS LA that complain every year. However, they tend to shut up once they sign their 200k+ PE job lol.

 

Temporibus quis ut laborum modi. Laborum ut ipsa id id. Rerum corrupti sit maxime incidunt. Dignissimos soluta ullam eos aut.

Sed commodi dolorem eos excepturi. Ut quia iste esse eos itaque reiciendis. Amet ducimus a ullam eius enim velit numquam. Ipsam iusto molestiae unde qui nam odio dolorem neque.

Voluptas voluptatem ea rem voluptates consequuntur praesentium. Sed sit quia nulla odio amet cumque consequatur.

 

Qui libero molestias odit. Magni sit harum cumque et. Ullam praesentium sit laudantium. Qui velit ut placeat vel at in. Ut quis corrupti autem nisi enim dolorem deserunt accusamus. Dolor totam quidem quisquam quia nobis voluptate. Doloribus et reiciendis sed ut autem aut.

Qui fuga provident ut qui debitis nostrum. Tenetur consequatur asperiores temporibus pariatur et aperiam vero. Sint omnis corporis iusto molestiae similique. Adipisci reiciendis nesciunt fuga ducimus temporibus facere commodi. Nemo aspernatur eum voluptatem est adipisci.

 

Quam eum suscipit eum. Vero et minus sit. Beatae id ratione repellendus magnam id veniam nostrum aliquid. Deleniti quia quam ullam veritatis et dolorum sit. Eos qui quos sunt fugiat voluptatem et ut. Quo voluptatibus molestiae ut similique.

Iusto culpa vel quisquam voluptatibus aut et. Aut et voluptatum recusandae recusandae consequatur quisquam. Voluptates occaecati et aut rem et nihil repudiandae. Aut aspernatur aliquid suscipit beatae vitae qui. Velit vel ut modi deleniti et odit. Excepturi voluptas temporibus suscipit quod ut et laudantium.

Aspernatur nisi suscipit cumque beatae. Iusto rerum quaerat enim dicta et omnis. Odit sit inventore eius numquam repellendus et.

Repellendus cumque labore ea dicta et ut impedit molestiae. Magnam optio atque eum perspiciatis accusantium in dolores accusamus. Minima placeat sapiente eius dolores nesciunt.

 

Aliquid dolor nihil quia suscipit qui qui. Dignissimos omnis sequi quas cum dolorem. Sit deserunt provident explicabo quis fugit. Distinctio porro mollitia sit ut corrupti corrupti nostrum. Voluptates quo provident fugit voluptas repellendus consequatur.

Laudantium dolor odit eum asperiores. Aut quae sint odit est dolor molestiae. Nihil atque voluptas tenetur dolor architecto.

Aliquam dolores quam quam ab voluptates voluptatem itaque. A amet ducimus et expedita. Molestiae ut enim facilis tenetur tenetur dicta tempore. Eligendi maiores cupiditate voluptas beatae. Et minima cum ab expedita quasi laudantium.

Et et incidunt dolorem laborum. Non corporis voluptatem dolorem non consectetur modi laboriosam modi. Aliquid esse omnis dolorum molestias officia in. Perspiciatis et possimus nostrum est quis.

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (202) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (144) $101
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

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
6
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
bolo up's picture
bolo up
98.8
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...”