Bulge Bracket vs. Middle Market
I know I'll be working the same hours as a BB analyst based on what I was told at my interviews and will make roughly the same year-end pay. So what is the benefit of working for a BB? Is it just exit opps and resume boosting? and if its that, is it that big of a boost?
I just figure that getting into the industry is hard enough and which bank you work in really can't matter that much especially on the analyst level.
Bulge Bracket vs Middle Market
Client interactions and exposure to business. These are most common difference mentioned between bulge brackets and middle markets. The idea is that it is easier to understand the structure and operations of 500 million dollar company vs a multibillion dollar company.
Bulge brackets still win in terms of brand name. Exit opportunities… In most cases (not all) it easier to “trade down” then “trade up”. The other consideration is that large banks have more resources and can outsource some their print, research and graphics work to their respective departments
If choosing between two offers the decision should probably be made on fit and then group. Both bulge brackets and middle markets will provide great exit opportunities.
Recommended Reading
bb will for sure get you futher in life, with the exception of a few boutiques: Greenhill, Evercore, Blackstone
"bb will for sure get you futher in life"
wow...you know so little its sad
"wow...you know so little its sad"
Ke18, You've described the majority of the posters on this board.
IronBanker, being a middle market bank just means that the bank typically executes smaller deals (anything under $500 Million). There are plenty of reasons why working at a middle market firm will "for sure get you far in life".
Although you're sacrificing "prestige" by not working for a BB, many middle market analysts will tell you they are able to play more meaningful roles on their deal teams.
In terms of pay scale, salary will typically be the same, but bonuses won't be as large in middle market banks as in their BB peers.
Best of luck.
I don't buy the line that at a middle market or boutique the analysts get more "hands on" experience with modeling, client contact, etc. My friend works at Jefferies, gets staffed on doing the Kinkos print jobs, hasn't really done any modeling, and gets home at 6:00 every day. While a great quality of life, he hasn't really learned anything and will have worse exit ops than if he took his BB offer.
I'm pretty sure that Jefferies analysts do not go home at 6 in the afternoon. Has your friend only been there for 3 weeks or something?
Well, the reason exit opps are limited is that the PE world is already tiny. It's not like for every single mediocre investment banking shop there is a PE fund waiting to snatch up young laterals.
Lol, maybe me meant 6:00 AM the next day. Jefferies was the only bank I did not pursue after an informal with two totally-tweaked-out-bloodshot-red-eyed-caffeine-and-speed-freaks who literally YELLED at me, "THE CULTURE AT JEFFERIES IS GREAT!"
There's "downtime" and then there's "digging up 10 year old threads on WSO" downtime.
Exit ops and "prestige" aside, I would say the biggest difference between boutiques and BBs are resources. BBs have a lot more resources to allow you to concentrate on more important things.
For example, instead of having to 'google' or 'wikipedia' research materials, or hand-hold some high-school drop out at Kinkos on how to not screw up a book, BBs have research departments (outside of ER), dedicated 24/7 print shops, and graphics departments to handle time-consuming mundane work. People at BBs get to concentrate on modeling, talking to investors, making offering materials, and all the other bullshit that recruiters fed. That is what I think the biggest diffference is.
I agree with Bateman on the "hand-on" experience myth. If you look at any CIMs by Harris Williams, William Blair, HLHZ, whoever, you'll notice at least a half a dozen to a dozen deal team members on the inside cover. While GS, Citi, Lehman usually have 3 or 4.
Middle Market Analyst Experience vs Bulge Bracket (Originally Posted: 07/03/2015)
Can anyone anecdotally speak to the differences between the analyst experience at a BB vs. MM bank? Currently a SA at a well regarded MM and would really appreciate to hear some people's personal experiences, if you had the opportunity to see both firsthand.
Aside from the MM HR spiel of "lean deal team", "close to management", "high impact", etc.. What are the main differences? What makes BB analysts more attractive to buyside firms as opposed to MM? Would like to hear input before full time recruiting gets underway.
i did 2 years at a mid-tiered BB but in a top industry group and now work in MM PE (to give you a sense of size, i see deals from Baird, blair, BB&T, SunTrust, HL, some smaller ones and some larger ones like JEF).
the main difference i see are the client interaction and exposure to the actual business. There's no way people can truly understand the operations of a multi billion dollar business (from PE perspective), but MM businesses? )$100-500m TEV), you can. analysts at BB will almost NEVER get direct client interaction. I'm not talking about where you can go present your model in a pitch. I mean actually in the trenches with PE associates and VPs.
i dont see why people prefer BB experience over MM except for brand name. bu t if you intend on staying in finance, Baird / blair, etc are all great names to be had on resume.
I don't have BB perspective but I once had lunch with someone very senior at a top BB and his thoughts on this matter centered around deal size. His (almost) exact words were 'If you work on the big deals, you can always go work on the smaller deals later in your career, nobody will question you can handle the smaller deals'. The reasoning being that the largest deals have the most complexities, thus you'll have more skills in your toolkit.
No clue if this is honestly true or how others in the industry see it though.
Appreciate both of your input - I think Whiskey5 offered something a little more in line with what I'm looking for. Was your BB stint an accurate indicator of the type of work you do on the buyside? Do you have any ex-MM colleagues that you've had this talk with? What is their take vs yours?
LBOsontheslopes, I think your source has a great point - but your response fuels my original question. I understand the general respect that comes with orchestrating multibillion dollar deals, but I'm asking what specifically it is about the BB experience that prepares you more for a career in sub $1b investments (i.e. 99.9% of portfolio companies). Your source is absolutely right that people assume you can handle it...I just wonder whether there's anything to back up that assumption.
Having worked at both a MM and a top BB, I can't say I agree with your "HR spiel" at all. My deal sizes at the MM were $250MM - $3Bn, however as the analyst I found my role was almost exclusively processing information. I was never giving a deal or pitchbook any original thought. It was all filtered (heavily) by an associate and ultimately completely rewritten by a VP / Director. End of the day, the only product of mine that made it into any materials was a chart or model output. As far as execution, I was involved with both buy and sell side processes, however it was clear the bank I was working at lacked significant process experience (which was somewhat concerning as an analyst) and made it a bit harder to navigate live deals that weren't capital markets. I found the deal team at the MM to be larger than BB (it was fairly common to see 2 analysts on a live deal).
At the top BB (deal sizes from $200MM - $30Bn), analysts were expected to think on their own and have opinions on a deal or proposed transaction. Analyst work consistently made it into the final materials and it was usually better put together than that of the MM. Deal teams were as lean (if not leaner) than at the MM. Analysts had more autonomy and I found skill sets developed a lot quicker given there was more ownership for the work (and a different mentality between the two places). Client exposure was about the same on live deals.
I'm not saying its standard experience, but at top BBs I've seen analysts craft better investment theses and stronger stories (as it seemed a more common practice than at the MM firm). As for buyside recruiting, I think a major player is just buy side comfort with the sell side firm and candidates from that firm. I.e. if PE fund X regularly takes Barcap analysts, they know they can expect a certain level of ability. With a MM firm who hasn't placed at that fund, its a little more of a risk (given there's no standard for quality). Firm connections can help too, in the event a Principal at a fund calls an associate, VP or MD at the bank to ask "hey, we're looking into possibly hiring analyst X, is he any good?"
These may not be industry wide standards, I'm sure it varies, but that's just what I've seen.
how are associate's lives at CIBC? same as most middle market banks, where analyst and associates are pretty much interchangeable? i.e. either an associate OR analyst will be staffed on a deal team, rather than both?
Best quality of living, with pay, prestige, and hours being the factors? Bulge Bracket vs Middle Market vs Elite Boutique (Originally Posted: 07/22/2014)
What is your personal consensus on who has it the best? Everyone needs sleep, to practice good health, etc, but the pay and prestige of a Goldman Sachs is certainly nice.
Who has it best in your own opinion?
Why did you have to go and start another one of these threads... And BB don't even pay the most.
What prestige are you referring to exactly...
Don't live other people's lifestyle, decide on what you think is the best. From your other unnecessary posts, knowing you're a target student, stop sounding so dependent and think for yourself for once.
Thanks for the laughs..
I thought about laying into you, but it'd be too easy, you have a public linkedin, I know what school you go to (good school by the way), etc.
here's some serious advice.
let this be your first lesson in finance: you are not special, no one will treat you any differently than someone else because you have the gall to ask questions that have already been answered, there's no such thing as a free lunch, and only superficial dickheads really care about prestige & fashion to the tune of picking their firm based on that (great comment about it in this thread: http://www.wallstreetoasis.com/blog/young-money-perception-vs-reality-o…).
best of luck, and WA HOO WA!
Sorry i don't start until July 2007.
Is the bonus really lower than BB. I can definitely see that since the deals aren't as large. But there are less people to pay. I've just heard and read that MM bonuses can be just as high as BB (45-65k).
I just can't believe that working for a BB can provide significantly better exit opps. Better yes, but not significant. I-banking is I-banking.
Perhaps its just wishful thinking since I'll be in a MM. But I'm also going what I've read elsewhere.
And in terms of resources, CIBC is a huge bank in Canada with just a smaller MM arm in the U.S. So the resources and research are probably just as good as a BB. But then again, CIBC isn't a boutique. Hence the MM vs. BB comparison.
Middle Market vs Bulge Bracket in Terms of Hours (Originally Posted: 03/16/2007)
I just found this forum a couple of days ago, found some really useful information. One question I do have though is what is the difference, if any, in the hours worked by a summer analyst/first year analyst at a MM bank vs a BB? The prestige of working for a BB really isn't that big of a factor for me, so if I could work at a smaller firm for less hours and probably even less pay, that would probably be the ideal situation.
Just for reference I'm a college freshman, 3.85 from non-target, IT and Econ double major. Thanks a lot in advance.
FYI, 45-65 is not street average for BBs, it's more like 70-80.
I would almost call it significant. The big difference is that your top shops have better contacts within all the top hedge funds and sponsors. Second is that most BBs are pretty active in helping analysts out by sending around internal-only job postings and having HR people dedicated to analyst exit ops.
You're signed up already, I'm not sure why you need validation from anyone else. Just go there and work your ass off, and things will fall into place on their own.
The hours are pretty much the same on average, the BB analysts pull a few more all nighters though I'm guessing.
But on the whole, if you're expecting a different experience at an MM.....don't count on it. Hours will be 100+/week, and pay will be Street for the most part.
I find it unusual that any banker average 100+ hours a week...mean is probably more like 85
I am curious as to how much variance there is between working in NYC and other locations. I've been told that there is a difference, albeit marginal, in the amount of hours worked by Associates in NYC vs being out of NYC. Can anyone comment on this?
Admo, there's a guy in my group who averages (yes, averages) around 115. He has been known to work 130s-140s, though.
There are also groups who average 85. It's all a matter of where you end up.
given there is a general "face time" culture in every company, like Mis Ind said, it's all about the group you fall in.
I agree with that, but if you take out all the outliers and throw in an average, 100+, in my opinion is way too high across all groups and banks. However, my roomate, now at a hedge fund, worked at Goldman FIG = DEATH, and he was much higher than myself, he was prob 100+
especially if there are more transactions. so, if you work for MM, chances are that your group will be small, hence you work a lot more hours.
my individual experience has been not 100 regularily..but more often 90+ for my team and other product groups.
Is there any difference in hours between NYC and another city? Such as SF? Or does it all just depend on who u work for?
more hours = more deal flow; more deal flow = better experience; better experience = better exit ops, b-school, etc.
Banking is not a lifestyle business. If hours are that much of a consideration for you, go into consulting. As an analyst, I would be worried about working with any group that doesn't average 90+.
Middle Market vs. BB after the first few years (Originally Posted: 02/14/2011)
So after reading various threads for the past few months I've noticed that many people say the following: Don't begin your career in the Middle Market if you want to work in a BB or high tier financial companies.
The question that I'm left with is just how middle market is meant. I accepted an offer with a middle market firm (FBR, Oppenheimer, RW Baird, Piper Jaffray, think along these lines) and I know that I would, or so I think, like to stay in the Banking industry and perhaps eventually make a switch to the BB. If I'm at one of these companies now, how will that affect me in the long run. I've always thought that being in the middle market you get a lot more client exposure and that this would be beneficial if you want to remain in the industry. Would it make sense to try and lateral to one of the BBs? And if so, how long should I wait before attempting this. My guess would be no sooner than 3 months but you guys would know better. And if this is the case, what is the best way to go about lateralling?
Thanks in advance for the responses. I'm really just trying to get some insight for the future.
I-banking is I-banking, but if your experience involves doing the mundane activities that a BB sources to internal print/research/graphics departments then you don't get as much exposure to modeling etc. and will not be able to contend for the best exit ops.
not 100% sure but ive heard a lot of people say wait at least a year before attempting to lateral
Yeah. It's always a good sign if you spend at least 24 months at your first company. You can do an internal transfer after 12 months, but stick with the same company for at least 2 years. And it's always nice to get that bonus.
If you leave after less than 18 months, your managers usually have lost money on you. So think long and hard before you do that- your manager placed a very expensive bet on you by hiring you, and you owe it to him to let that bet pay off.
Caveat: I tend to track a little more to the conservative/loyal side than a lot of folks when it comes to careers.
You don't owe anyone anything, period. If you want to go join another firm, then do it; just be professional how you go about it. People leave for better jobs all the time....
Companies aren't loyal to you so you don't owe them loyalty back.
Lateralling aside, what about the initial question of middle market vs BB... will there be opportunities at BBs in the future if I stay with the MM?
Stick it out two years at the MM. Learn as much as you can. Get into a great business school (HBS, UChicago, Wharton, etc. etc.) in the geographic area you are trying to establish your next professional network. Then apply to all the BBs.
After you get the MBA, coupled with your 2/3 years IB experience...you shouldn't have a problem getting into a BB if you get your foot in the door. Make lots of friends in business school so you can leverage their network into your BB job.
If banking is already your decided long-term career, then why are you worried about BB vs MM as exit ops don't matter to you? You may find you really like the MM...or...you hate banking all together.
yes exit ops at BB are better than MM, the point is you are still far aheard of your peer group simply by doing banking. exit ops may not be better than BB but they are far and away better than any other job one can get, with the exception of top consulting gigs
What MMs would you take over BBs (IBD) (Originally Posted: 03/12/2013)
Obviously subjective, but what MM banks would you take over the BBs if you were concerned about exit opps? Obviously there is variance amongst groups, but in general, what (if any) middle markets would you take over the bigger guys? Also, does an analyst at a firm like UBS really have a better shot at larger PE than someone from a top mm like JEF or HLHZ? Finally, I realize that this is POINTLESS, I'm just wondering.
And before anyone freaks out about not using the search function, I haven't found a very good recent thread for this
I would take Jefferies over UBS any day of the week.
Overall, JEF > HL
But in LA, HL > JEF
Lazard/Rothschild/Moelis over anything except JPM and GS.
lol
You do realize that these are not MM banks? Lazard and Moelis advise on many of the largest M&A transactions.
Really? Those are MM groups now?
I may agree with this (not 100%, and would definitely include MS), but I don't think that this is the answer to the question asked.
Would take HL and Rothschild restructuring offers over a lot of the BBs for exits into distressed debt funds. Other than that, I wouldn't take any MM m&a over any BB (in either their HQ or a strong regional office). Pretty sure even UBS provides better exit ops vs. any MM.
You realize UBS IBD won't exist in two years right?
I think the idea of taking a MM over a BB isn't too farfetched, if you actually want to work in MM going forward. This applies whether P/E or banking.
If you don't want to work in the MM space, then UBS (or insert any other "low tier" BB) would still be better due to more relevant transaction work.
Same with distressed: If you want to be in a distressed HF or PE firm, take a rx gig at any of the top boutiques.
Just my two cents
This is sound.
I agree, there are certainly strong MM banks with good dealflow that would tempt kids away from a weaker group at a BB (particularly if the end goal is MM PE).
Also,isn't this thread really just a "rank the banks" thread in disguise? i.e. "I'd pick XYZ MM banks over ABC BB's, but not CDE MM banks."
Maybe a better/more interesting question would be: Would you take a regional BB offer over a MM offer in HQ? Again, very group dependent and generalized, but then again, these questions always are.
thanks for the input so far!
Moelis & Co. is really good. They'll never be a bulge bracket because Ken wouldn't allow it. But the things they've done in five and a half years goes to show how much of investment banking is based on relationships and long-term client focus. The way that shop is run and with the resources they have, the bankers from every other firm, I would consider it 5th or 6th on a list of banks.
Depends entirely on office. GS, CS, MS, and JPM west coast offices are, in many cases, equal or better than the NYC offices for PE exits. Many regional offices are extremely weak though.
So although there are small variances amongst offices, I feel that shouldn't affect the big picture.
Confused by your comment. Yes, the regional offices are almost exclusively coverage.
Houston: O&G San Francisco: Technology/Healthcare Chicago: Industrials
Coincidence or no, those groups are some of the best at GS/CS/MS/JPM, and place really well. Not really relevant that they're 'regional.' I don't think the GS TMT guy gives a shit that he's not working in 500 West when he gets his Silver Lake offer and watches his NY buddies all competing for the same 5 megafund spots at H&F.
I like the blue MMs the best, the classic milk chocolate taste in every bite. But given the choice between a bag of button-shaped candies and a thick chunky candy bar, I'll just take the Snickers.
What about the regional middle market banks like Harris Williams, janney, Baird, etc.? are these names more in line with what the op was asking?
I think most people would consider Lazard, Evercore, Greenhill, and Moelis along with any BB offer seeing as how they offer just as much in the way of compensation/exit opps
Again, none of the banks listed here are MM boutiques.
Interesting- I know someone who took top MM offer - think HLHZ, Blair, Baird over BB offer - CS, BAML due to interest in MM PE. What do you think about that? What about if he wanted HF? Would mid to lower tier BB be better than top MM?
CS and BAML have tons of exits to MM PE, so I don't think that MM PE exits would be a relevant concern. Look, there are definitely exits from both, and if you have a strong preference for the team / work environment at a MM IB, by all means, go for it! However, as a practical matter, even low-tier BBs generally have more exits than MM banks. RX is an exception.
I did the same thing. And i wanted peace of mind that i would be getting a bonus and not worry about being laid off. Call me stupid but im happy and thts what matters.
RX being an exception
I'm pretty sure HLHZ Rx places really well into distressed hf. I'm not too sure about Baird or Blair in regards to HF opportunities.
True, im from LA and know ppl in HL RX. HL FAS/Corp fin is pretty shitty, its sub most other MMs and only gets their name out their because its the same name as the RX arm...but yea if you're in HL RX specifically you'll get shots at HF, distressed funds and Mega Fund. An analyst in my superday specifically said he was interviewing at Carlyle lol
My friend chose Moelis over UBS / Credit Suisse IB.
Again, Moelis is not a MM bank.
Maybe we need to create a thread reminding what MM banks are? That really escalated quickly...
It really depends on the city. In Toronto for example, I would much rather work at a Canadian MM an a bulge bracket. RBC, CIBC, BMO > GS,CS, MS, BAML >>>> UBS
You got an extraordinarily tough job to get. CIBC is very solid. Don't get caught up in masturbating to BB or MM as many on this site and in college do. Just get there and perform. The money will come in and the opportunities will follow. But for right now, just feel blessed to be set already and have a damn good job.
And be sure to crack open a beer as well, nothing like partying on a Tuesday night when you've got a job already.
"To Know Me Is To Love Me"-Jebus Price
IB analyst job at MMB vs BB? (Originally Posted: 03/19/2015)
can i get into bb if i gain some exp at MMB?
Can I be an engineer if I went to college for engineering?
Yus.
mm v bb (Originally Posted: 03/19/2010)
quick question - is there any conceivable reason to take a top tier MM bank over a top tier BB bank?
I'm drinkin one now
only if ur in ecm
how about top MM vs lower bb?
to clarify, mm is m&a and bb is coverage ibd (#1 on league table). problem is i like ppl from both groups and there are difft selling points:
mm -only m&a, stronger dealflow per employee -strong placement into mm pe
bb -pitching, pitching pitching -ohter products (some ECM/DCM) -strong dealflow -big big group
people is a huge factor. I'm guessing the top MM is WB? anyways I think having people who like you and will stick their neck out for you is a big factor, definitely makes the analyst life style less painful.
jimbojones96, William Blair is definitely a well respected shop in the middle market.
To the original poster -- decide whether you're interested in working on large cap deals or MM deals and then go from there.
well jimbo if WB is not top, which firms are top?
I chose BB but it's up to the person. It seems like op is already decided on mm though based on his pro and con list.
what are the top MM? Harris Williams, HLHZ, etc?
It seems to me that you might tend to get a little more involved in a deal at a MM firm than at a BB, but I could be completely wrong. First year analysts at my bank and a comparable MM firms are brought to every pitch (and actually asked to speak fairly often), they handle ALL of the modeling, they are actually able to voice their ideas for the main themes in marketing materials, they attend all management presentations, they are on the phone with potential buyers, etc.
For those of you at a BB, are you getting the same level of involvement?
thanks for the opinions guys.
in response to compbanker, i think all else equal, no one would choose midcap deals over large cap deals. i think the main selling point of the mm is the more comprehensive analyst experience (some of what longshot listed).
i was hoping that a bb analyst in a group that handles its own modelling could comment on the type of experience they got.
the reason i'm partial to the mm is cuz i think the numbers/models are all generally bullshit.
Offers: BB Capital Markets vs. MM IBD (Originally Posted: 11/01/2007)
Probably will see a lot of these topics in the next couple of days
My friend has an offer in Capital Markets with a top bank in NYC (think GS/MS) and also one with a top tech boutique bank out in the west coast that does small IPOs (just under 100m). I don't think she likes hours of industry groups, but doesn't mind capital markets. Looking at PE or business school in the future.
Don't worry about the pay CIBC pays street.
Exit opps are quite different, but who cares... don't get caught up in exit opps unless u don't like banking 12 months in. I am rounding out a third year thought I'd stay to associate, but decided to head for opps
Are MM boutique banks easier to get offers at versus a big name NYC bank?
the boutique bank she got an offer in recruits in only 3-4 schools, so it's harder to get in if you arent a target. some people go there because they couldn't get BB, some just like it
ive seen a couple of posts from you. seems like you have a lot of friends who have a lot of decisions about banking/finance who come to you. interesting.
Yea, my friends talk about stuff like this a lot - generally we're not really happy about our internships. Thought it would be easier to ask a question instead of everyone sign up for accounts. Your thoughts on the offers?
Capital Markets, period. IB sucks bizalls. Even with the promise of POSSIBLY making it rain cash working in PE, IB still sucks. S&T all day every day.
question: if you intern at say a top bb/respected MM bank your junior year, and say realize you dont want to do IB, do you have the option/feasibility of getting into S&T, and more specifically a sales desk?
yes waltersobchek you can. now don't hijack my thread :)
also, i heard GCM at MS allows ppl to move from GCM to IBD if they want (or vice versa).
Which is better for exit opps?
markets are cooling. take the top BB offer.
if the market hits the floor the big guys' mds will pitch against the boutique's mds.
if you ran a firm and you're ipo'ing. do you want GS or Thomas Weisel left lead. even though it costs more, you want GS.
hedge yourself.
plus the weaker market means better hours if your group is legit.
dude, boutique's are gaining big market share in invesmtment banking...dont underestimate them
Where will I get the best expereince? BB/MM? (Originally Posted: 10/12/2010)
My goal is to get the most experience in the shortest period of time. I'm looking for deal flow and to gain exposure to senior bankers and deals. Other than the obvious path of working for the best firm, which firms, or strategies can help me accomplish my goal of getting the best experience?
I would say if you have both options, you should go to a BB. You can never go wrong going to a BB in my opinion. I did an internship with a MM before. I observed analysts getting to run the deals by himself...
However, deal sizes are smaller, and the training at BB is top class, compared to a MM.
if you are comparing something between DB,WF,etc to jef,Baird,hw,. It will really depend on which group you will be placed in because they have the same rep to PE guys' eyes.
As whateveritatakes stated, if you are in a good regional group (say...db tech, Barclays NRG), then by all means take the BB. But if you in a good MM group (jef tech, jef healthcare, jef lefin or hw richmond, Baird chicago) compared to a crapshoot to some nyc group, i would take the MM spot
It seems the group is very important and there are some MMs that will give you more experience than a BB but you'll sacrifice on training. Good question though!
You all kidding right? I talked with a number of ex-BB analysts who lateraled to boutiques (both MM and elite). They all say that the experience at boutiques blows BB experience out of water. That being said, you cannot go wrong with a brand name.
There is literally no difference between a $25MM M&A deal and a $1BB M&A deal.
whateverittakes has no idea wtf he is talking about.
Impact of MM vs. BB on MBA chances (Originally Posted: 12/05/2012)
I am a junior at a semi-target/target (public ivy) that has a top 10 undergraduate business program and a top 20 MBA program that is great in finance. As summer analyst recruiting ramps up, I'm wondering what kind of disadvantage you are facing for top business schools (top 5/10) coming from a well known MM versus a BB. Will it be a lot more difficult to land the elite business schools coming from a MM or will IB in NYC at a recognizable firm put you far ahead of the competition already? Additionally, would being in a really strong group help your chances or do business schools not know or care enough about the industry for this to matter?
Thanks for any and all input.
To be honest you're putting the cart before the horse here. The job market is tough right now and no undergrad student is in a position to be excluding a company from their job/interview search because it might put them at a disadvantage when it comes to applying for an MBA at least three years from now. Being unemployed kills your MBA chances, not working at a MM vs. a BB.
When you have offers from both is when you think about stuff like this, and yes more often than not people will go with the BB because of stronger name recognition/network. Right now you should be focusing on putting as many high quality applications out there as possible, studying hard for finals, and practicing your interviews.
Definitely agreed with the above. I know more than a few people (all from semi-target undergrads) who did stints at well-known MM shops and have gone on to HBS and then respectable PE stints. Much of it has to do with the quality of the work experience you get, your undergraduate background, what organizations/activities you devote your time to outside of work, and the GMAT.
Thanks for the advice. I was actually asking because I have been fortunate enough to land an offer at a well known MM where I loved the culture and the people. I just wanted to know if taking an internship and hopefully job there would seriously hurt my chances of making it to at a top tier business school. Thanks again.
how would a top MM firm like HW/Jefferies fare in terms of MBA chances vs a lower tier BB? this is very broad base question so assume all else equal, only difference would be name on resume.
BB Industry or MM M&A? (Originally Posted: 06/11/2009)
Both for full time, both NYC - it's a weird situation - they're having me start in September. Anyway let's just say the BB is one that's not doing so great now, though for an analyst experience and exit opps it might not matter as much. The position is in an industry group that sources most of its models to its own M&A team.
The position in the MM (think along the lines of Jefferies - not elite but recognizable) is in the M&A group. If my long term goal is PE, would the M&A experience be better or the BB name?
It's tough to say. If your ultimate goal is PE, both paths will give you the opportunity to get there. Choose the one you're most interested in or like the people the most. Also, in the current environment, you may want to place a heavy emphasis on job security and surviving your two years.
I work at a middle market M&A shop and our placement into PE was nearly 100% until recently as a lot of PE shops love M&A bankers.
~~~~~~~~~~~ CompBanker
I interned for a pretty good sized PE fund last summer when they where raising a round of funding & looking for junior people. I helped the admin sort the resumes (we got a flood of them): m&a/referenced on one pile & pretty much everything else into the not getting a phone interview pile. We then sorted them into deal size worked on & educational background. If you can get down range on some good deals at this shop go for it.
westfald, just out of curiosity, how did you sort them based on educational bg? what were the groupings like?
Thanks for your responses - pretty sure I'm going to go with M&A.
I'd say go with the M&A shop, unless the industry group has a lot of deal flow and is a strong player in the PE space(strong player in the industry on a bank ranking basis and has a PE presence in terms of reputation and past deal exposure), you plan to stay for 2-3 years, and you would have the opportunity to transfer groups if you are not getting enough modeling experience, to the M&A group/Lev Fin, after 1-2 years. Realistically, the M&A shop is probably a better fit, although it could be interesting to know what the exit opportunities have been, historically, from the boutique.
IBanker www.BankonBanking.com Articles, News, Advice and More Break Into Investment Banking
M&A, though if you want to do Mega-funds it depends on which BB it is. MM M&A will usually place you in MM PE.
In an M&A group you'll get experience across a broad range of industries. If you get good deal flow, you will have something to offer regardless of what industries the fund focuses in.
...is the M&A shop a total chop shop or is it a legit MM bank? Also, is it general M&A or M&A within an industry? You want to make sure you'll have actual deals to work on or else your experience will be dog shit. I work at a MM bank, and I've gotten to work on a lot of deals and have some good stuff on my resume (buyside and sellside experience), but I still can see how a BB name goes a long way.
k2, They placed more emphasis on Ivy backgrounds & good targets (they interviewed four guys from UT & A&M's finance programs one engineer, & considered a couple guys from Berkley, Mich, Virginia) but long as they we're from one of those schools & had the smarts (SAT scores, grades not too huge a deal, they didn't even ask for transcripts for guys who came from any recognizable firms). Deal experience and recommendation from people they new was pretty much number one. Also this fund was by no means a megafund, but they still had a pretty intense portfolio & their LP's were some big players, so team dynamic was really important & they want to brag to their LPs their guys from top schools. They ended up taking an associate & at first 2 analysts but just went with one. The associate actually had his Masters from Stanford in Financial Math & worked at a S&T energy/commodities (the firm was/is niched primarily in energy & this guy knows the market inside & out) fundamental hedge fund up in Canada & New York but had two years at BB M&A. The analyst they took actually beat out a bunch of Ivy guys w/ good deal experience & he was from Rutger's but he completely smashed the GMAT, worked on a huge natural gas deal I guess in NJ (the deal I mean) and got a big recommendation from one of our GP's former colleagues who oversaw the deal on the buy-side.
So the analyst's gmat score was a factor in the evaluation even though it was a pre-MBA hire?
Really only because he had taken it right after undergrad. Maybe his SAT's weren't so hot, because he had that instead of his SAT's.
BB vs. MM (Originally Posted: 10/24/2007)
So I've been fortunate enough to get a handful of offers this fall for full-time jobs- 3 BBs and one MM. I've cut it down to just two- CS San Fran or Jefferies Broadview in Boston. Not looking to have someone tell me where to go, but I'd love to hear from some of the bankers on the board what they think of these two offices. If location weren't a problem I'd probably take CS because it is the bigger office, but I grew up in New England and Jefferies is a great MM bank, especially in tech.
Any thoughts, assuming offer packages are the same? Loved my (brief) time in San Fran, but I have literally no family within 3000 miles of there and I am very close with my family. As far as exit op's are concerned for grad school/PE/VC, which is better? San Fran has tons of VCs but Boston has plenty too plus some big PE shops. For grad schools, do places like HBS/Wharton take a lot of guys from MM banks, especially smaller offices like the Boston office? Not that Boston doesn't have dealflow; their Jefferies office there does almost all the tech work for their bank.
Also, what about lifestyle/culture? They're both more laid back than NYC but I got the sense that the CS SF office is worked pretty hard themselves. Is it a tough transition moving to the west coast after living in the east your whole life?
a) SF is not going to be some kind of bizarre environment if you're coming from new england - people there are educated, they're not trashy like they are in SoCal. The finance industry out there is full of the fratty types you will find anywhere else.
b) Go with a bulge-bracket firm. You can always move to Boston later. It wouldn't be much fun to start in Boston and then have to watch your Boston exit opps get snatched up by former BB analysts.
[edit: for some reason, because I edited this, it sent it to the very bottom of the thread]
As far as Jefco goes, would I get a look in a few years from New England PE shops like Bain, Berkshire, Thomas H. Lee, Providence Equity, etc? And since I'd be working in San Fran, will working on the left coast hurt my chances of getting a PE job in Boston, despite having better name recognition than Jefferies? Ultimately I want to work in Boston or Providence so I figure maybe being closer geographically could play in my favor at Jefferies vs. at CS.
SoCal = trashy? Perhaps you've been spending a bit too much time in the inland empire...
smuguy: No. I'm also referring to trashy LA county and trashy Orange county.
I am from New England as well, so what you leave your safe zone for a little, it will be okay. Also, from the sound of your post it seems as if you have sold yourself on Jefferies and looking for someone to either confirm this sell or give you a reason to reconsider CS. Go with your gut/heart Boston seems the one right for you.
Actually I'm kind of leaning towards CS because I want to try something new, it's just a big change and like I said, Jefferies would be the safe choice. Good place, good guys, good location, but CS could be a great place, good guys, good location (for the short term at least). Just trying to get a better feel about the culture esp. at CS as well as exit opps at both places.
To each his own I suppose, though I would put both NY and SF in an equivalently trashy category.
smuguy, Manhattan is one of the classiest places in the country, but I wouldn't expect someone who went to SMU to get this. Let's just say there is a reason the Rockefellers, duPonts, etc have a place on the upper east side but don't have a place in southern California.
LA is full of a) uneducated douchebags who worship anyone with even a minor connection to "Hollywood status" while scoffing at everyone else, and b) uneducated douchebags who could barely afford the bus ride to get there so that they could "make it in LA."
Ok, all trashiness aside, anybody have a feel for the lifestyle/culture at CS San Fran? Deal flow is good from what I can gather, but how about the hours? And exit opps? Any help would be a huge plus.
It's smug, not SMU. Although in retrospect I should have gone with something more clever, like inserting an "MD" into my name.
Not that itâ€s important, but I live in classy Manhattan.
smuguy, with regard to your comment about the "MD" in my name, perhaps you aren't familiar with my reputation and the fact that I am a psychiatrist and went to med school at SUNY Downstate. See http://www.drmarkklein.blogspot.com/
bump-
deadline is approaching and I'm really unsure of this. anyone have ideas about the opportunities coming out of jefferies? if i can get a chance to work at a solid p/e shop coming out of jefferies vs. cs i'd take jefferies because it's close to home and i really like the guys working there, while i have nobody i know in san fran and do not know the people at cs sf well.
its hard to pass up any bb offer, much less one of the 3-4 best tech firms, but quality of life is important to me. i'm not driven to try to get into kkr or bain at all costs like some, but i do want to find a good place to work coming out of my two years in banking. is working at jefferies bounding me to mediocrity in the future (ie- low chance of getting into a very good b-school or p/e shop)?
CS SF office is very good. You'll get great opportunities there and even if the market is bad, they are so tight-knit that if you do good work your MD's will get you contacts with great firms. Very good placement out of that office. One thing I've noticed in buyside recruiting is that brand name and MD reccommendations are the two biggest factors (next to personal performance during interviews) in getting hired.
jefferies in boston is very strong in tech M&A. they've done some very solid MM deals over the last 6 months ($1.8B lbo of Kronos, $800MM lbo of Vertrue and various others of this caliber). if your offer with CS-SF is in their M&A group, you will obviously have the opportunity to work on plenty of large-scale, landmark deals within the technology industry and your phone will be ringing off the hook with calls from head hunters recruiting for bulge bracket pe shops by the end of your first year. however, if your offer is in their corp fin group and you spend most of your time doing IPOs (which is considered much less relevant for the buyside), your chances of landing a top tier PE job will probably be less than if you worked at the boston office of jefferies (assuming you do a good job and have earned the respect of your MDs).
since it seems like you are leaning towards jefferies boston office, i'll reassure you that your exit options will be plentiful as long as you're a strong analyst and build a strong relationship with the MDs. however, if your offer is within CS-SF's M&A side and your ultimate goal is to get into a bulge PE, you'd be foolish to pass up the opportunity.
Thanks for the help guys, I ended up taking the CS SF job for a new opportunity away from home and the exit opps/office lifestyle. Probably going to work in M&A but we haven't picked yet so I'm not 100% certain.
congrats! really good group, had an opportunity to interview with them last year and they seemed genuinely nice guys
BB firms vs. MM (Originally Posted: 02/06/2013)
monkeys,
I've received an offer for a SA BB for being a credit analyst, and a SA MM for S&T. the question i've got is should I take the BB position just because of the name & reputation, even though being a credit analyst is ehh? or should I go with what I feel I'm more interested in (the S&T)?
any feedback is appreciated.
Private Regional MM vs. Bulge Bracket (Originally Posted: 01/30/2011)
Hi:
I interned at a private regional investment bank this summer. I've been reading everyone's comments for about a year now. The funny thing is that this bank isn't ever listed on anyone's comments. Regardless I am wondering about the following:
1) This bank doesn't have a formal training program for trading/sales. (Personally I want to move into sales after undergrad but would be open to trading). Should I be concerned about this experience? I think it might actually help me because I can focus on my niche as opposed to being "stuck" with munis and not learning taxable side of business. How can I leverage this experience to a future employer?
2) Does anyone have opinion/ranking/discussion about private regional banks? I hear nothing about them. What about banks like Stone & Youngberg? No one gives them any love/hate on this forum? Why (why not)?
3) Does anyone know if a regional bank would typically pay for MBA?
4) I am returning this summer to the same bank. How can I express interest in learning about a specific product when there is no traditional training? Should I just focus on getting a job after college with a big bank instead?
Thanks.
-Prospective Monkey
This isn't meant to be an insult, but it's likely because we haven't heard of them before. You are most aware of your direct competition (ie who are you fighting for a share of the pie) and the names that come up as your counterparties.
MM vs BB in Houston/Dallas in energy (Originally Posted: 01/27/2010)
This question is just out of curiousity. And sorry if it is a stupid quesiton to ask.
What is the main difference between a BB in a Houston office or a mid to top MM that is well-known in the specific industry?
Pay? Exit opps?
For example, a BB in Houston in their energy division or .... Simmons and Co.?
I know that is a top MM but there are many other MM in Houston and Dallas that are specialized in oil/gas/ect.?
What are the main differences? For this are specifically?
Thanks.
-Lookingforanswers
Go for the BB, much better network and opportunities if u wanna pursue them elsewhere. Go big or go home.
Everyone knows MS, GS, and so on but people outside of energy most likely wouldn't know Simmons. Simmons is unique in that it places very well into natural resource PE and business school so in that situation the BB really only provides a bigger name. However, most boutiques/MMs excluding the elite boutiques don't place as well in PE and business school.
What about other boutiques that are energy focused
Scotia Waterous, Tudor Pickering, others in Houston, ect.
do places like these place into nat. resource PE
I have heard Scotia and Tudor are both great groups. I havent seen people from those groups at First Reserve, Riverstone, NGP, and Quantum though. Maybe they place well at smaller funds that I dont know about.
-
Deutsche Bank has a big energy presence in Houston.
-
is the work different between BB and MM? (Originally Posted: 01/18/2010)
I've been working at a regional MM for the past six months but am still not sure what the typical analyst experience is suppose to be. Worked on 1 closed M&A deal so far but my only modeling experience there was accretion/dilution. I've spent the majority of my time working on pitches and deal docs of all kinds.
Just wondering what first year analysts do at other banks. TYIA.
what are your hours like at a MM?
It depends on the MM and dealflow
My hours at MM (aka regional boutique) are roughly 9AM - 11PM.
Modeling experience: BB vs MM (Originally Posted: 01/04/2009)
Hey, I was wondering if there is any difference between the modeling skills that you acquire at a BB vs in the MM. I interned at a MM over the summer and I'm going back full-time. It seems to me like the modeling at MMs is less comprehensive than at BBs. Is this true?
.
TXU type deals, and any other major deal in the billions are not going to happen. Advanced modelling for the next 2 years will not exist as major buyout/M&A will be rare, IMO... Alot of the modelling even at BB will focus on large mid-market deals... A balance sheet links to a CF statement the same for a large buyout as it does for a mid-market one... the real difference comes in the degree of line items you stick in there... You should take any job that even has exposure to modelling because the detailed stuff you'll learn at higher levels anyway or later at a PE shop...
as for training, well it's either they give you an overview of how it all links up or you learn it on the job... it's a question of when you learn it, not whether you learn it... And btw, you'll forget half the stuff from training and relearn it when you try it yourself..
Modeling is pretty standard across the board...the major difference is the quality, comprehensiveness (or complete absence) of analyst training programs at various MMs
Depends on the MM shop. Some of the more established MM shops do touch deals involving public clients, some of the smaller MM shops do not. You have to realize that even the BB's do many many "middle market" deals (500mm to 1.5bn in TEV). In fact, most of the deals you do will be in that range, even in a bull market. There simply aren't enough elephant sized deals out there (and the ones that are there are sought after by every BB anyways).
So I'd say that on the whole, while you may get very complex modeling experience at a reputable and established MM, you're more likely to get exposure to complex products and situations when you're dealing with transactions involving public companies at a BB.
Finance at BB or IB at MM? (Originally Posted: 09/13/2007)
I have a Finance offer from one of the big BB. I kinna want to do IB just because of better pay/prestige, but I doubt I can get anything at a BB b/c of my GPA/experience/banks recruiting at my school. My other option would be to interview with MM firms. Should I bother doing that? Would an experience at a MM give me better chances at a good MBA than experience in Finance at a BB?
take IB at an MM over finance at a BB. Finance is back (middle?) office and you will not learn that much. you will learn a task and will repeat it over and over without gaining much knowledge or insight.
My offer is for middle office. The Finance position I am talking about is going to be mostly reporting work, budgeting, maybe some forecasting. Depending on the bank, the Finance Division has management groups (eg IB Management) control, tax, strategy and planning etc.
One other thing: location is kind of important for me. Most of the MM are not located in NYC just because of the nature of their clients, and I kinna want to go to NYC.
Minima nostrum consequuntur et ut ab modi numquam. Suscipit ut veritatis eaque. Facere praesentium qui nobis. Rem iusto voluptatem sed. Vel aperiam saepe dolorem voluptas quo quae. In officia ut eos vel voluptatibus qui. Excepturi ea pariatur est minima.
Dolor explicabo in consequatur corporis quibusdam. Delectus aut omnis quae ea ea. Temporibus tempora sunt qui omnis doloribus esse qui. Atque nihil cupiditate doloribus labore et exercitationem commodi fugit.
Beatae velit laudantium iusto eaque. Distinctio esse quo tempore ipsam et est tempora. Aut in rerum occaecati iusto qui dolor.
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...
Dolorem a aliquid rerum est rerum quam voluptas. Unde exercitationem est illo iusto. In in ea possimus sit at laboriosam.
Optio quia cumque aut eligendi et alias ad. Exercitationem aut maxime ipsa rerum eos ab. Illo nesciunt sed sint commodi ut. Illum enim et qui modi dolorem. Libero tempore cupiditate ullam veritatis mollitia est molestiae. Odio impedit ut dolorem assumenda.
Dolore sit et deleniti voluptas dolore quos et. Ipsum dolores nam ratione quis pariatur explicabo dicta exercitationem. Non expedita doloremque est eos maiores. Recusandae consectetur excepturi sed autem.
Consequatur aliquid non tenetur eos. Aperiam ut ipsa cumque ut nihil. Voluptatem alias et rerum maxime dolor sit. Quidem ut expedita vero. Voluptatibus sed numquam neque dolorum voluptas quam.
Reprehenderit autem nam quisquam eum eveniet eveniet rerum vitae. Sed laboriosam accusamus cumque suscipit quasi laudantium ex nisi.
Qui et ut id harum quis fugit voluptas. Accusantium eos dicta dicta quia perferendis officia amet. Enim quisquam voluptatum iure et. Fuga fugiat id sint consequatur. Hic ea veritatis doloribus quam qui.
Earum veniam voluptate harum fugit labore. Error incidunt vel beatae et delectus dolorem. Blanditiis sint corporis ad autem.
Nisi in voluptas ex doloribus. Voluptatem necessitatibus sit ullam corrupti non dolor ut quis.
Qui perferendis saepe consequuntur in quidem. Laborum quod similique dolores sed dolorem qui in.
Voluptatem velit sed recusandae esse repellat nemo eligendi. Porro ut qui sed fuga deserunt laboriosam. Molestiae et esse id quidem repellat assumenda. Est ea consequatur esse ad veritatis. Veniam hic iusto similique magni rem dignissimos et. Illo ducimus beatae molestias optio rerum consectetur rem excepturi. Dicta beatae voluptas libero id minus aut similique sunt.
Quod nesciunt qui a dolorum incidunt debitis illo. Optio voluptatem culpa voluptatibus nostrum iste. Praesentium voluptatem alias et dolor aut asperiores.
Ut fugiat quod voluptas quibusdam aliquid qui. Distinctio quam odio magnam odit beatae dignissimos quaerat. Minus hic ut in est ratione et. Mollitia est soluta quis explicabo vel mollitia nam. Aut reiciendis at enim incidunt provident exercitationem. Culpa qui reiciendis sit voluptas.
Illo ut distinctio deserunt consequatur voluptas velit distinctio. Libero neque dolor laborum laboriosam expedita minus et. Sunt qui in aliquam ducimus natus dolorem. Sapiente nam quia eligendi est fuga laudantium. Exercitationem vel autem voluptatem qui numquam quod.
In et consequatur iure assumenda magnam in. Voluptatibus repudiandae voluptas sint et aut atque autem. Ex fugit et ab dicta est quis a et. Quis et velit nisi ad neque eos et. Dolore temporibus molestias sunt assumenda rerum.
Quis ab molestias sed ut. Voluptatibus nemo quaerat soluta magni dignissimos et quasi quaerat. Consequuntur dolorem labore consequatur est voluptatem quo atque.
Accusantium beatae minus error molestiae id nam cumque. Quas nostrum at consequatur culpa quo vel. Illum quia deserunt rerum dolores. Molestiae rerum ipsam odio.
Doloribus dolorem facere nulla. Expedita ad ea qui esse labore eum consequatur. Non aut in adipisci veniam. Earum ex vitae et rerum autem itaque maxime. Maxime vitae quas inventore quia.
Accusantium non non ut reprehenderit velit eos quo laudantium. Veritatis facilis cumque provident quia ex nobis ducimus. Alias qui corporis commodi consequatur ut incidunt accusamus. Ipsa illum dolores et non itaque minima repellat sunt.
Molestias qui deserunt nemo sapiente maxime totam. Ad aut dolor eos suscipit ut omnis rerum. Delectus voluptatem libero et quis fugiat dolor. Illo hic totam molestias animi. Eveniet esse quia et ut modi.
Odit et porro soluta ullam est. Architecto et qui repellendus assumenda optio. Fugiat rerum omnis velit sint nemo sed.
Dolores expedita deserunt laboriosam culpa tempore neque. Fugit ut ducimus voluptatem aliquid. Optio rem sunt dolorum in ea aut eius.
Sint doloribus dolorum non delectus ipsa quo quas earum. Blanditiis et in nobis porro. Repellat a reiciendis nam nesciunt earum quae reiciendis vitae. Cum in ut id provident quis eum est.