Just out of curiosity, where do the bottom bucket analysts go after their 2 year stint (assuming they make it that long). It seems like the big or prestigious HF or PE shops are only interested in the elite analysts. Same goes (I imagine) for MBA programs.
So where do these people go? Crappy business schools or regional financial services companies?
| +139 | Is my life over after not getting GS? | 33 | 1h | |
| +73 | Best IB group on the Street | 35 | 6h | |
| +66 | Thoughts and tips on how to speak like an investment banker. | 25 | 1d | |
| +58 | BIG FOUR ARE PARADISE | 15 | 1d | |
| +49 | Tell me one good reason why Jefferies isn’t going to be a top bank in the next 5 years | 23 | 18h | |
| +38 | UBS Outlook | 28 | 2d | |
| +35 | How to deal with egotistical team? | 6 | 3d | |
| +26 | Very ridiculous interview feedback | 13 | 11h | |
| +26 | Got RBC offer but I have cold feet accepting. | 34 | 11h | |
| +26 | Why Is It Called Investment Banking? | 8 | 7h |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
A significant amount go industry or crappy b-school.
Not necessarily. crappy analyst in a brandname BB can still make it to an elite B school if he can get one or two good references (even a crappy analyst has his supporters in his group), and write good essays. the b school admissions committee will not know your class ranking.
I've never been an analyst and I'm curious to know whether the elite PE/HFs actually know your rankings in your class. Sure they would have a general idea of your capabilities through working with you, but I believe HR cannot divulge to them your ranking in class?
What happens at boutiques? Am I wrong to assume that they do not rank analysts? And if they don't, then how do the PE/HF shops differentiate analysts there? Only through the regular interviewing / hiring process?
Are you guys sure analysts are "ranked"? Do you mean which bonus bucket they are put into, because almost everyone gets middle bucket, unless you're really outstanding or really bad. I've never heard of a numerical ranking system for analysts...seems impossible to do objectively, anyways, since there are so many different groups and it'd be real tough to compare analysts across groups...
they definitely go to top b-schools. if they were that good, they wouldn't go to b-school in the first place.
I got a pledge class ranking my first year of college. This whole wall street analyst class mentality is starting to sound like the good ole' days.
PE/HF shops work with headhunters who will ask what your ranking and/or bonus number was. Certain shops will ask for your bonus check stub to make sure your not lying.
So, the percent that would qualify as "crappy" would be relatively few % of total analysts. Any idea what kind of proportion of analysts end up in the bottom bucket?
Roughly 10% of analysts get top bucket, roughly 15% get second tier, roughly 60% get slightly below that, and 10% get bottom.
At my bank they force ranked analysts within groups, although more than 10% of analysts in my group got top tier bonus. Headhunters and buyside shops find out your ranking by calling directors and managing directors and asking them point blank what bucket you belong in (even if it's before reviews).
Bottom tier analysts are usually bottom tier because they just didn't care, or they didn't care enough to give up that much more incremental lifestyle for 15-20 grand more. They usually realize banking isn't for them and go do something completely different, sometimes B-school, sometimes fellowships abroad, completely different industries (being a recruiter, for example). Because face it, banking is not that tough to do. If you're truly struggling in banking and get bottom tier, chances are you'll struggle with b-school apps, as well. A few lower half or even quartile analysts manage to get into small PE shops.
.
How much of the ranking is determined by performance and how much by politics keeping differences in banks aside?
They go to law school...? just kidding.
"We are lawyers! We sue people! Occasionally, we get aggressive and garnish wages, but WE DO NOT ABDUCT!" -Boston Legal-
banking is not theoretically hard, but the lifestyle certainly is. I don't blame someone for realizing that being a cube bitch isn't what it's cracked up to be.
retarded. They only 'rank' the analysts based on top bucket/middle/bottom. You don't get a valedictorian in an analyst class, considering some do very different things. It is highly possible you go to a great b-school, even after a crappy stint. Good undergrad, good GPA, good firm, good GMAT or whatever should be fine.
That being said, how well you do you have to do in order to be the top? The whole thing is a learning curve, esp. for those coming from liberal arts schools without finance training. How are they supposed to compare you to XYZ finance major who can write macros in his/her sleep? It seems to me as if a lot of it has to do with politics, and how hard your hiring manager is willing to 'go to bat' for you during the bonus/HR meeting.
Excepturi et neque ipsam non aut. Tempora placeat libero omnis rerum et. Neque qui amet nobis magni consequuntur quia.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...