I think one reason is that the global economy is kicking back up. USD as a safety is not providing as much return as other currency/commodity. Another reason I think is that Fed has been keeping the rate low, so the USD supply is large.

 

Does the shift from US Dollars to commodities, US stocks, or gold have any effect on the exchange rate of the dollar?

Since all these assets are denominated in dollars is there any net effect on the exchange rate when switching from one to the other?

 

Yes. Everything that you can buy and sell is some kind of currency. They are just not as liquid and as convenient to use as USD. If too many people are chasing for commodity and foreign currency then there's a lot of supply for USD, driving the value down. US stock is a bit more subtle. I don't think there is really a direct relationship between them. There are a lot of effects that you have to consider. Other people may want to chime in for this.

 

But if the commodity in question is stated in US Dollars, don't you first need to buy US Dollars to then buy the commodity (oil, gold, wheat, etc)?

This would increase the demand for US Dollars and the exchange rate.

 
nick_123:
But if the commodity in question is stated in US Dollars, don't you first need to buy US Dollars to then buy the commodity (oil, gold, wheat, etc)?

This would increase the demand for US Dollars and the exchange rate.

If USD tanks against the major currencies worldwide (as it has done recently), would that not stimulate global demand (ie. everyone else who uses a currency besides USD) for commodities which would fuel the surge in prices of alternate assets?

The increase in demand would necessitate a shift in demand from the USD to other assets (in short, folks are dumping the USD for other assets like Gold).

This has been particularly prevalent in the gold markets lately...think tha should clarify...

 
Best Response

"Stock prices have rallied, and crude-oil prices have risen as well. But investors still believe prospects in developing markets like China are more attractive than those in the U.S. That is leading to a flow out of haven currencies such as the dollar and the yen and into emerging markets, the euro and commodity-related markets."

The excerpt is from a WSJ article about two months ago: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124879236270887007.html

"Investors pared riskier bets in higher-yielding currencies on sinking stocks."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124956398177010947.html

"Investors who have been using the dollar as a stable spot to stash funds during the recession have flocked to riskier assets this week, with oil close to the top of the list."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125250257903295559.html

I don't get that last quote. If crude oil is denominated in US dollars, won't the dollar not be effected?

 
zonk:
i think its going to trade up for a while, then trade down. Then we might see it trade up, or it could trade down.

So basically, it will go up or down.. or stay the same. Bold statement. :)

-------------- Either you sling crack rock or you got a wicked jump shot
 

At this point in time, the rise or fall of the USD versus the rest, not just the Euro, is data dependent. I am sure you know about the bull run of Sterling, Euro, AUD, CAD and others against the USD. All of a sudden, ISM report broke the trend and now everyone is looking forward to the “Employment” situation on Friday.

Housing and GDP are pointing to a fall in USD whereas Manufacturing and Employment, as of now, are not indicative of a recession. Moreover, the growth rate of GDP has to go down below 2% in order to trigger another sell-off. Overall, the long run picture is indicating a fall in dollar (which may or may not change).

As of now, I have heard predictions of 1.4 for Euro, 2.1 for Sterling and 110-112 for Yen by the end of this year. In my opinion, foreign exchange market can not be predicted beyond a couple of weeks or few days (that too is contingent not precisely predictable). In the long run, the predictions somehow make sense, but FX is not meant to be traded like equities. I do not recommend a Warren Buffet style approach to FX. A typical position in FX may last from few hours to a maximum of few days and mostly not more than 2 weeks (which is rare).

The key is to understand all the possible variables and then reacting according to the change in fundamentals, technicals and announcements. I think we are going through a soft landing and it may turn in to a recession or it may turn in to healthy growth.

 
Viper:
A typical position in FX may last from few hours to a maximum of few days and mostly not more than 2 weeks (which is rare).

Isn't it the case that in the short-term currencies are so volatile as to be basically unpredictable (aside from reacting to news and data), but in the longer-term they are somewhat predictable. For instance, a year ago it seemed relatively clear that EURUSD and GBPUSD was going to make its way higher - look at research from UBS for instance. Why not get in on some of those positions in a way that you aren't leveraged so much that if it goes the other way for a bit you get a margin call, but that you are still able to speculate one way or another, more or less based on fundamentals (deficits, gdp growth, trade balances, etc.).

Is this something that funds do or is it mainly really quick, arbitrage or very short-term speculative trading?

 

Dollar rallies across the board on stronger than expected US data. The ISM services index showed a rise to 56.4 in April, beating expectations of a 54 figure, following 52.4 in March. The employment index rose to 51.9 from 50.8 while the new orders index rose to 55.5 from 53.8. The weaker than expected weekly jobless claims figure was also instrumental in triggering fresh dollar buying.

Will French Politics Give Another Black Eye to the Euro?

Almost exactly two years to the month after France rejected a referendum on European Union Constitution-dealing a severe blow to the euro—France’s decision on its next president may have an impact on the single currency. This Sunday, socialist presidential hopeful Segolene Royal will challenge the rightist candidate Nicolas Sarkozy in the second round the presidential elections.

Mr. Sarkozy served as Interior and Finance Minister in the outgoing rightist government and won the first round of elections with 31.2% over RoyalÂ’s 25.9%. Mr. Sarkozy is seen as an advocate of free markets, vowing to cut taxes, create more labor market flexibility and reduce the role of State intervention in private companies. He also favors abolishing the 35-hour week brought about by the last Socialist government and intends to increase the number of hours to improve personal incomes and overall growth.

Ms. Royal’s socialist–oriented agenda favors state intervention in many industries such as defense, aerospace and energy companies, while raising pension funds partially funded with taxes on stock market revenue. A victory by her would not only be a surprise (since she is trailing behind with 5-6 percentage points in opinion polls), but also weigh on the euro due to her social-friendly policies.

Both candidates have openly spoken in favor of weakening the euro and taking greater political control from the European Central Bank. Even the market-friendly Sarkozy complained about the strength of the euro, which he said strained French exports further widened the nationÂ’s trade deficit. But with Segolene RoyalÂ’s policies seen in favor of higher taxes and more State interventionism, the surprise effect of her victory would not only remove the center right incumbent government but also trigger a negative euro reaction.

Last nightÂ’s presidential debate between Royal and Sarkozy was deemed a draw by most political analysts, but an Internet poll showed 53% of the 900 people polled to have found Mr. Sarkozy more convincing than Ms. RoyalÂ’s 31%. But it is notable that centrist candidate Francois Bayrou (who came placed 3rd in the first election round and whose electpriare could trigger the swing vote) said he would not vote for Mr. Sarkozy based on his performance in last nightÂ’s Televised debate.

The notable aspect of the latest pullback in the EURUSD is the lack of negative news from the Eurozone along with the first upside surprise in US data in weeks. Tuesday’s stronger than expected US manufacturing ISM showing a rise to 54.7 in April from 50.9 in March was initially shrugged by the dollar as it was released at the same time as the Pending Sales Index. The index showed a 4.9% decline in March sales after barely growing in February, prompting a sell-off broad in US equities and the US dollar on concerns of prolonged weakness in US housing. But equity bullishness quickly re-emerged after News Corp’s $5 billion bid for Dow Jones & Co, which triggered the a new wave of buying—typical of high profile merger announcements—and boosted all the major equity indices. Quite notable about the initial equity market sell-off was the shrugging of the 3-point increase in the manufacturing ISM report as traders were preoccupied with the decline in pending home sales. But markets went on about their record breaking ways, pulling the dollar higher with them, at the expense of the low yielding yen.

But itÂ’s important to caution that the current strengthening in the dollar reflects a welcome improvement in one part of US fundamentals, rather than any signs of weak in Eurozone fundamentals. With net speculative euro longs versus the dollar at reaching their third consecutive weekly record high at 111,282 contracts, euro bulls will require reasons for a retreat before the next push higher. Such reasons include TuesdayÂ’s stronger than expected US manufacturing ISM report, and possible upside surprises in the US services ISM (due today) and FridayÂ’s April US payrolls.

Yet the principal source of euro weakness could come from SundayÂ’s French presidential election in the event that socialist candidate Segolene Royal wins over Rightist candidate Nicolas Sarkozy. A combination of an upside surprise in US payrolls on Friday followed by a Royal Victory could drive the euro towards the $1.34 figure, especially as markets would reduce the odds of a Fed easing later this year.

-

Ashraf Laidi

CMC Markets 140 Broadway 30th Floor New York, NY 10005

www.cmcmarkets.com [email protected]

212-644-4220 866-367-3987

Over-the-Counter Foreign Currency trading carries a high degree of risk and may result in serious financial loss. Foreign Currency trading is not suitable for everyone. CMC Markets is remunerated for its services from the spread between the bid and ask prices.

This publication is intended to be used for information purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. CMC Markets (US) LLC is registered as a Futures Commission Merchant with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and is a member of the National Futures Association.
 

Higher the volatility, higher the earnings and higher the risk. Why would anyone trade if there is no potential for earning? Unfortunately, volatility and risk compliment the ability to earn large amounts of money. In FX, the opportunity to make tons of money exists in the Short-Run. I would love to hear from someone who has read about an FX trade lasting more than few days or weeks. I am sure many have done it-with the exception to Buffet's bet against USD I do not know many who have had a long term strategy.

What happened to EUR and GBP in the last one year is rare:I remember the Euro at 1.24 and the sterling at 1.84. In hindsight, it is very convenient to claim that the Sterling gained 12-14% in 10-12 months. But, most of the times the gain can be very small to make the whole investment worthless! The variables that affect the FX market are different from the variables the equities and even commodities. If you look at commodities, the supply/demand factor is overwhelmingly large. Therefore, the commodities are simply rising in the long run. Try to compare that to the Euro/USD daily or weekly plot since 1999. The business cycle and the Central Banking plays a large role other than just demand and supply. Even if you make a case that there is a potential to earn money, I will make a better case of making money in the short run. Such is the nature of FX.

As an example, how do you define the time frame for your investment in FX? You can vary the time frame and make a strong case for any historical movement, but how do determine this time frame and that exact movement while speculating in the future? You probably know that in Equities rise in the long run and this is why Warren Buffet's strategy has made him billions. You can definitely do the same in FX, but the chances of a successful strategy are relatively small. Have you looked at the returns of the funds that are invested in FX? The average is either 2-3 % or -ve. Institutional Investor is a good source in order to check this claim.

 
Viper:
Have you looked at the returns of the funds that are invested in FX? The average is either 2-3 % or -ve. Institutional Investor is a good source in order to check this claim.

As long as the expected return is positive, why not just leverage it up? if you could get fairly consistent 2-3% returns, why not take that leverage and go 10x more, making that 20-30%?

 

FX is not in the same asset class as equities. Also, FX prop fits well in a sell-side environment for several reasons.

I am not sure how funds play with FX. I was suppose to meet few buy-side folks, but didn't get a chance. I am a fan of sell-side when it comes to FX. If it was Long-Short Equity, then it would be a different case.

I am myself trying to learn about various strategies. Have to sit on a desk to learn. At this stage, I am only sharing what I have learned by following the markets and by meeting FX traders.

 

It boils down to personal choice of the Trader or the Group or the Bank.

What if you don't look at the leverage as something which increases your return? Why not just look at pure growth rate?

I understand what you are saying. To me, the appreciation, as an example, is still 2-3%. It is true that the leverage amplifies your return based on the cash in hand. But, what about the precise growth rate? My point was the growth rate or appreciation regardless of the leverage.

I am sure what you have recommended is practiced by fund managers.

This is a classic textbook example of looking at a problem: Assume there is no leverage :)

 

Options Traders Most Bullish on Canadian Dollar in Five Weeks

By Liz Capo McCormick

May 3 (Bloomberg) -- Options traders are the most bullish on the Canadian dollar in five weeks amid signs of economic strength and rising commodity prices.

The Canadian dollar this week reached the highest in almost eight months and has strengthened more than 6 percent versus the U.S. dollar since March 5. It is also gaining on speculation the Canadian central bank is comfortable with the currency's strength.

The premium that traders pay for Canadian dollar call options that grant the right to buy the currency, over put options which give the right to sell, this week reached the largest since March 26. The so-called risk-reversal rate for one-month options is minus 0.25 percent. A negative reading indicates a premium for currency calls relative to puts.

The risk reversals show that the options market is looking for more bullishness for the Canadian dollar,'' said Adam Cole, senior currency strategist in London at <abbr title="Royal Bank of Canada"><abbr title="Royal Bank of Canada">RBC</abbr></abbr> Capital Markets.The fact that the central bank suggests that there is no concern over the value of the currency is something that the options market'' views favorably.

The Canadian dollar traded today at C$1.1066 per U.S. dollar, after earlier in the week reaching C$1.1048, the strongest since Sept. 7. The Canadian currency is up more than 5 percent against the U.S. dollar this year.


A Silly example, but it works.....

What if someone had gone long Canadian and short USD on September 7, 2006 (when it was 1.1060) and bailed out of the position today (when it is 1.1066)? The result would be barely any profit. Just do the math.

If some trader had anticipated the peak of the CAD bull run and at the same time considered Tory's tax policy and the political environment, that same trader would have reversed the position in October to earn the profit up until the rise of USD to 1.17-1.18 range.

You have to factor in economic reports, political environment and commodity price since Canadian is an exporter of Oil, Nat gas and Gold along with other stuff.

A good trader would have again sensed a rebound once the sub-prime reports kicked in. It was the same time when Stephen Harper's government was able to control the Quebec problem. And, you get solid economic reports, after bad reports, in Canada while the US economy is under heavy scrutiny due to the sub-prime issue. Not to mention, the oil prices rebounded from the 50-55 USD level.

Think about it: why not go short and long several times instead of just sitting long and making virtually nothing in 8 months!

Also note that the appreciation of CAD between September and December would have been negative or not more than 1% depending on your entry and exit.

Such is the nature of FX:)

 

work in london for the summer if you want to...not for the pound.

cost of living in london is higher, and unless you think that the dollar is going to devalue significantly over the pound in the next 3 months (which you may, but is most probably unlikely over such a short time span), you will by and large end up making the same amount of money. of course, if the dollar appreciates significantly against the pound in the next 3 months...but this is also unlikely obviously.

 

living in London you won't be able to save nearly as much money as you would working in New York. London is ridiculously expensive. I've lived in New York and London and if i'd have to guess London is between 1.5 to as much as 4 times more expensive in terms of regular expenditures you'll have to incur. But if you're working somewhere where you can get weekends off (ER, S&T) then London is a great place which you can use to go see rest of Europe.

 

My mistake. I dont think I was clear. I am working in the US this summer. What I meant was, due to the current state of the US economy, would it be worth it to apply for full time positions in London (starting summer '09)?

 

definitely not because of the strong pound. I've lived in London before, and a rule of thumb is that $1 and 1 pound have the same purchasing power (comparing NY and London). You are actually worse off as a banker in London when you factor in costs of living issues. In real purchasing power, London bankers earn the least - it's Hong Kong, NY, followed by London.

 

I'm an analyst in London and I'm saving. When I go back to the States I will definitely have a nice chunk saved up.

I have noticed that most fellow analysts (esp male ones) spend ludicrous amounts of money because they can't (or won't) cook or do laundry. Try to limit those stupid expenses and you'll be surprised at how much you can put away. Someone told me he spends £30 a day on food - frankly that's just stupid.

 

I agree with fp175. Saving in London is not impossible. If your salary is 37.5 then after taxes you have just over 22. spend 12 on rent and 5 on food and entertainment and 2 for misc. and you can easily save 3 + entire bonus. It's all about budgeting. I also still have the student mentality of being semi-cheap.

 

"living in London you won't be able to save nearly as much money as you would working in New York. London is ridiculously expensive. I've lived in New York and London and if i'd have to guess London is between 1.5 to as much as 4 times more expensive in terms of regular expenditures you'll have to incur. But if you're working somewhere where you can get weekends off (ER, S&T) then London is a great place which you can use to go see rest of Europe."

This is interesting. Could you please name a few regular expenditures in Manhattan which cost one quarter (or even one half) of what they would cost in zone 1 London? I'm looking forward to NY now...

 

Don't go for the pound, go only if you want to. That said, if you wanted to go to London, why didn't you apply the first time around?

In terms of comp, its probably a wash between the two cities. Rent is roughly the same (maybe a little cheaper in London), but daily costs are more in London. Base comp is usually higher in London in nominal terms (eg 1st yr associate: 60K GBP vs. 95K USD).

 

howhigh, it might be beneficial for you to take an intro macroeconomics class.

- LIFE101: MONEY SUPPLY & WEAKENED CURRENCY By deadjackal

for your question, the simple idea is that when the central bank feels that the home economy is not performing up to its full potential, then they may choose to lower interest rates which spurs growth and increases investment and consumption in the economy.

they do this by purchasing government securities on the open market which increases the money supply in the economy by increasing the available funds private banks have to make loans.

then, the increase in money supply is what actually decreases interest rates. This is for obvious reasons, more money available means credit is cheaper and borrowers have more lenders to choose from, decreasing the interest that lenders can charge.

then on the worldwide foreign exchange markets, this results in less people being interested in buying that home currency. Why? obvious reasons- international investors want to invest where they can get higher returns. They buy currencies of the economy where they want to invest. Since the lower interest rate in our home economy will lead to lower returns on almost all home investments, investors will not want to buy that currency. And those that have it will sell it and buy into the currency of an economy with better investment prospects. And of course, when the demand of a currency lowers, then the price will

lower to-> weaker dollar.

-

LIFE 102: TRADE DEFICIT & WEAKENED CURRENCY By deadjackal

This is more interesting and a bit more ambigious. Trade deficits occur of course when imports are exceeding exports for the home economy. This debt is then financed by foreigners who invest in the U.S. (most obvious is purchase government securities). Eventually though, the foreigners have to be paid back and the deficit must become a surplus. That is, in theory. One of the methods through which this can happen is if the home currency depreciates. (imports will become more expensive and exports will become cheaper) For a while, the US has been a good place to invest leading foreigners to continue to finance the US deficit. But now, some people believe that our trade deficit is starting to catch up with us. This is a little controversial. Basically in the long run the trade deficit will lead to a weakened currency,

but in the short run the relationship is somewhat weak.

-

*I'm not an econ major and you should know that this is just a simple

introduction. you'll need to take an econ course to understand in more detail.

- *here's a image we can look at, showing that huge decrease starting in early 2002: http://www.imagehost.ro/pict/1603523947140b57ca3fe.png

 

So in order for the dollar to depreciate, there needs to be an exchange of the dollar currency for a different foreign currency.

Said in a different way, the only time the purchase of stocks or commodities will affect the dollar is when those alternative assets are denominated in a foregin currency, right?

 
sa4hire:

 one reason - when the fed decreases the fed funds rate, they increase money supply.  more supply w/ demand constant = weaker dollar.

In addition to actual changes in the fed funds rate, investors are also pricing in anticipated future discount rate reductions (consensus holds that two 25 bp decreases (50 bps total) will occur in 1H '08), which puts further downward pressure on the dollar (particularly given that other currencies aren't expected to be further "discounted" quite as heavily - e.g., the ECB is expected to decrease rates by only 25 bps in '08).

 

one reason - when the fed

one reason - when the fed decreases the fed funds rate, they increase money supply.  more supply w/ demand constant = weaker dollar.

My apologies.  You were the first to respond, and I thought you were trying to give a conclusive one-line response to an obviously complicated question.

 

The cyclical nature of the domestic economy and the increasingly inter-relatedness of the global economy have profoundly impacted macro-economic policy.  The primary reasons for the weaking dollar are due to excessive lending (1% rates under Greenspan), $100 oil, and geo-political events.  US GDP growth has been robust and will simply slow (to the brink of a recession) in the next few quarters as inflationary pressure and market turmoil tie the hands of the Fed.  Ultimately, the Fed will be forced to cut rates by 50bps at the Jan 29/30 meeting but they then risk increased inflationary pressure and further softening of the dollar.

I don't think lost faith in the US economy is a significant factor (you crazy communist) in dollar weakness as it is merely symptomatic of a slowing economy.  Gold and platinum are at all time highs and oil is back where it was in the 80's (inflation adjusted).

The fact that China holds so much of our paper is worrisome to the future of the USD and the economy at large...

 

one reason:

no. probably not.  I really doubt there is "one reason" for anything.

Many reasons: the government, the fed, china, the weather, crabs, the spin of the earth, AIDS, the stock market, and the color of Greenspan's socks.  That's why.  But seriously, Junkbondswap provided a pretty good explanation of some of the factors that affect the value of the USD.  I believe Buffett has said that we will continue to have a weak dollar as long as the US spends more than its earns... can anyone explain that to me?  Does that make sense or did I misquote him?

 
F9 - Update:

one reason:

no. probably not.  I really doubt there is "one reason" for anything.

Many reasons: the government, the fed, china, the weather, crabs, the spin of the earth, AIDS, the stock market, and the color of Greenspan's socks.  That's why.  But seriously, Junkbondswap provided a pretty good explanation of some of the factors that affect the value of the USD.  I believe Buffett has said that we will continue to have a weak dollar as long as the US spends more than its earns... can anyone explain that to me?  Does that make sense or did I misquote him?

 I didn't mean one reason and one reason alone.  Merely that one reason, IN ADDITION to the others you mention, is the FFR being lowered.

 
 

Yes, if you have more imports than exports, than companies that sell goods in the US receive USD for payment.  However, they don't want USD, they want whatever currency their company is based in whether that be Euro, Yen, etc so they sell USD in exchange for those currencies.  Therefore, there is weak demand for the dollar if the trade deficit is large.

 

Essentially two factors drive the level of exchange rates: the relative level of interest rates and the relative strengths of the economy. If interest rates are lower in the U.S. than in the EU, for example, global investors will prefer to lend in the EU, thus raising the demand for Euros relative to the Dollar and weakening the dollar. This is what has happened over the last couple years as interest rates in the U.S. have been so low (as other posters have mentioned). The other factor is more complicated. If the U.S. economy is stronger than the EU, for example, U.S. consumers and businesses will purchase relatively more EU goods, thus raising the demand for Euros and strengthenging the Euro (weakening the dollar). However, a stronger economy will also lead to higher domestic interest rates (and lower EU interest rates) which will have the effect of strenthening the dollar. The net effect is ambiguous.

To clarify something mentioned by another poster, $100 oil shouldn't have much of an effect on the Dollar exchange rate since all of our large trading partners are net importers of oil and therefore high oil prices have the same sort of negative drag on all of these economies. In fact, the relationship really goes the other way. $100 oil is very much a result of the Dollar's low exchange rate, since oil markets are priced in Dollars. If you look at the increase in oil prices as measured by a basket of currencies rather than in Dollars, it is signficantly lower though still pretty scary.

Author of www.IBankingFAQ.com
 

One thing that a lot of people overlook is that the inverse relationship between the USD and crude is largely driven by OPEC nations (the sell side); as the dollar depreciates, these nations increase their OSPs (official selling prices) of the crudes that they market to the Western world in order to maintain pricing parity. Therefore as OPEC light sweet OSPs increase (and one of these is deliverable on the NYMEX WTI contract if i'm not mistaken), WTI will rise as well. If it didn't, East Coast refiners could potentially arb in WTI bbls and that would do it.

 

Someone forward her the WSJ article Eddie posted about retired workers having their savings decimated. She is a fool. How can these "bright" individuals at these schools not realize the implications of what they are advocating? Printing more debt to solve the debt crisis doesn't work fuckhead. God this gets me so heated every time I read these types of articles, yet I continue to do so.

 
invictus:
Someone forward her the WSJ article Eddie posted about retired workers having their savings decimated. She is a fool. How can these "bright" individuals at these schools not realize the implications of what they are advocating? Printing more debt to solve the debt crisis doesn't work fuckhead. God this gets me so heated every time I read these types of articles, yet I continue to do so.

You might have an addiciton to crappy news. Anyway yes the idea that lowering the value of the dollar and driving up all prices while refusing to admit that its causing inflation is about the stupidest thing to come out of washington and academia since, fuck i dont know this could take the cake.

Follow the shit your fellow monkeys say @shitWSOsays Life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid - John Wayne
 

nick123, you're right. There is NO effect on the exchange value of the dollar if you go from one dollar-denominated asset to another (including dollar currency).

The exchange value of the dollar is established by supply and demand in the Forex.

I think the drop in the dollar is mostly attributed to massive US deficits, inflation worries, and higher rates of return (read: riskier) on assets in foreign markets.

Basically the opposite of what was happening last fall when everyone was running towards the dollar.

 

Cumque quia natus veritatis quia impedit sit quia. Voluptatem facere eum eos voluptatum perferendis. Ea corrupti sit impedit. Rerum qui rerum eos ut voluptate facilis dolorem.

Totam ea sit quo laborum. Molestiae quod ea dicta quam et recusandae.

Quos dicta eum numquam voluptates facere ratione. Vel veniam ut illo reprehenderit quam. Sunt saepe hic maiores numquam voluptatum consequatur eius.

Qui dicta sunt aut cum. Labore nostrum natus officiis et. Consequatur culpa omnis deserunt fugiat aut.

Get busy living
 

Magnam quos nihil voluptatem pariatur delectus. Et rerum quo quia molestiae explicabo est veritatis. Numquam doloribus voluptas sunt ut eligendi cumque.

Ducimus tempore eveniet unde esse ut. Architecto ipsa impedit reprehenderit sint enim. Tempora ut est quo quae et adipisci. Ad ut totam molestias a molestiae et quas. Amet officia labore ut quis.

Provident quisquam delectus voluptatem assumenda ipsa ut quam occaecati. Rem adipisci eum voluptatem neque nostrum sint. Ab laborum et neque necessitatibus. Aspernatur voluptatem id dolorem molestiae voluptatem nesciunt a. Placeat ut nesciunt accusamus perspiciatis quisquam.

Et repellat sed quo facilis. Et saepe aut temporibus totam. Et enim ipsa nesciunt eius. Quo cumque exercitationem deleniti. Autem non dolorum quidem consequatur. Maxime tenetur natus provident aut labore placeat. Eaque sit excepturi similique soluta corrupti voluptatem.

 

Odit eum numquam non enim reiciendis. Optio enim dolorem dolorum incidunt quisquam sed consequatur. Iusto ut rerum nesciunt deserunt eum dolor debitis explicabo.

Et incidunt quos molestiae ut sequi qui. Beatae eaque omnis fugit ut quia. Sunt laborum sed tenetur eligendi qui ut voluptatem voluptas.

Quos ipsum aliquid doloribus reprehenderit labore dicta facere dolor. Assumenda et quidem voluptas ipsa quia natus ut. Molestiae delectus corporis nesciunt et aliquid deserunt. Consectetur animi et enim sit voluptatum et.

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
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
6
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
7
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
8
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
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...”