There's quite a bit of discussion on this forum about a firm having "top-notch" or "weak" exits -- or somewhere in between. However, as an incoming SA it's hard to get a good of what that actually means/how hard it is to get top exist. Is top-notch most people go MF/UMM? What would be the "median" exit at a place like PJT? Citi/Barclays? Guggenheim? Anybody with insight please comment -- I think it would be helpful for prospects on this site to get some perspective.
| +199 | 2nd casualty of BofA, 25 yo credit trader | 64 | 4h | |
| +178 | Associates not checking my work and getting mad at me? | 36 | 1h | |
| Am I insane? (NEED ADVICE) | 63 | 3m | ||
| +95 | How Much Parental Assistance Do People Actually Have? | 34 | 25m | |
| +86 | the new "email template" | 29 | 38m | |
| +85 | Is it appropriate to take time off after a breakup? | 23 | 49m | |
| +66 | Analysts bitching on WSO | 16 | 1h | |
| +60 | Fitness vs Traditional Watches (in Office) | 40 | 3h | |
| +60 | Why are UK, UK based and UK-countries related (India, Nigeria...) students so cringe on LinkedIn? | 22 | 2h | |
| +51 | How is Northwestern? | 15 | 22h |
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.
Wondering the same but for mid EBs versus lower tier. Also curious if the smaller nature of EBs makes the median exit better there just by nature of having fewer analysts
Unless you are at PJT RX or HL RX or GS TMT or some other cracked group the median exit is and always will be MM PE(and maybe even at one of those groups the median might still be MM just with much higher MF representation). Contrary to what the prospects in this forum tell you even at EVR the median exit isn't MF, the numbers just don't add up. There are so few MF's that it's impossible for every top EB/BB analyst to exit there especially since the top 3 BBs have way more bankers than a number of MF seats. Depending on your definition of UMM, I can see someone saying the average exit is UMM, but the difference between UMM and top MM is sometimes subjective, and hard to get a number down for fund size, I prefer just classifying it as MF(investing out of $10B+ fund size), sizeable MM(investing out of a $3+B fund size), MM($1-3B), and LMM(below $1B fund size). The 3B number is arbitrary and very arguable, but IMO feel like if you can raise roughly $3B in fund size the place is likely to be a place with either great returns and growing rapidly or a long history of solid returns.
Edit : Before I get MS thrown at me, I am one of the people at the top BB and there's way more of us at just the top BB coverage groups and M&A groups than total MF PE seats
Congrats on HL RX
Thanks for the laugh, just heard from this forum HL RX is cracked. As clarified in my edit I was assuming I'd get MS from prospect hardos : I am from one of the top BB's
Helpful answer, thank you. If that's the case, does it make more sense to divide exits by MF possible/MF not? And how much of a difference is there between say a mid-tier BB and a low-tier? Does it just come down to strength of candidate at that point?
I'm just speculating here, but I would think you get less MF looks at a mid BB compared to a top BB
Between the mid-tier BBs and low-tier ones, I would say except for the top groups at the mid-tier BBs (Citi/BoFA) which are more competitive for MF spots, the top of low-tier and the rest of mid-tier BB's are the same. The top groups at the low-tier BBs (UBS, Barclays with more of such groups existing at Barclays) will exit either the same or slightly better than the mid-tier BB other groups. Of course strength of the candidate matters, but that matters everywhere. You should be able to get MF looks at least from those mid-tier BB groups at least, and might from the top groups at the lower-tier BB's but it'll be a bit more of a tougher hill to climb. Sorry if that's not too helpful as I am not any of the respective firms so I am only commenting from friends' experiences and what I have heard about those funds.
Even more so in London lol there's like 30 MF spots per year max
Makes it more preftigious
The average exit for even the top 3 BB in London is not MF. HL RX is no where to be fukn seen and the average there for pee would easily be MM with almost every single one of their MF exits being distressed. Likewise for PJT but with the average exit for pe being UMM and the average for distressed being MF. Pjt and HL aren’t even top 15 in European league tables and hl m&a is quite literally focused on only LMM-MM mandates
No way we have hl rx kids on this forum saying their average exit is better than fucking evercore m&a. Jesus Christ what the fuck are you kids smoking nowadays. A mega fund is definitely not the ‘average’ exit for hl rx. The only 3 groups on the street you can make the argument of the average exit being an MF is PJT/EVR rx and GS TMT and even then that’s for all strategies including distressed. If only for MFPE then I don’t think any have an objective average exit there, but the top 3 would be MS M&A/GS TMT/EVR M&A. Any other suggestion like fucking hooligan lokey is insane
On average, HL RX can give EVR M&A a run for their money. HL RX has 8-10 analysts and 1-3 go to Apollo PE/HVF a year, 1-2 Oaktree, 1-2 KKR Special Sits / BX TacOps, and a ton go into elite distressed hedge funds. The firm is supportive of recruiting and that helps a ton. Of the ‘23 summer analyst class (I know it’s different but still), 2 went to Warburg (which only took 8), 1 went to Qatalyst, 1 went to Blackstone Infra PE. I can assure you neither the FT or summer analyst class for EVR M&A don’t have such good placements because they’re >40 people.
Also, GS TMT definitely doesn’t exit that well on average. Their kids barely take part in oncycle today.
PJT Restructuring below EVR M&A is actually an insane take. The reason EVR is so solid is because it exits as well as the average top BB group, but will still get worse outcomes at the elite level compared to the tippy top groups at the top BB's. Keep drinking the EVR Kool-Aid though. Also again the average exit being MF only being arguable for small analyst classes I do agree with, just not the case for EVR anymore given how big their class has become and how they are still better seats to be in compared to EVR.
Basically every shitter has a $3bn+ fund size.
MF = $15bn+ latest fund size (could be argued it's $12bn+ given fund sizes have decreased or been flat across the board the last couple of years)
UMM = $5-15bn latest fund size
MM = $2-5bn latest fund size
LMM = <$2bn latest fund size
Megafunds should be $15bn per fund at the very least, $20bn by many (including my own) standards
This is why I didn't want to get into the fund sizes, I absolutely agree it can be argued and everyone defines it differently. Either way, don't; think it particularly distracts from rest of comments, since you can adjust my comments regarding my understanding of levels to your own definitions of different tiers.
A few questions for you (and OP and anybody else who wants to weigh in):
HF recruiting isn’t standardised like PE is
Bump
bump
Stop bumping, the question has been answered more than adequately enough.
Exits are wildly overstated on this forum, the "average" exit is no-name MM PE or even massive downgrades like corpdev/no-name VCs.
I would say CVP, PJT (RSSG and non-RSSG despite this forum thinking that only RSSG automatically gets you BX/APO/KKR and non-RSSG gets you a $750MM latest fund size PE fund in North Dakota), LAZ and the secretive independents (Allen, M Klein, Dyal) gets you UMM as an "average" exit.
Tier 2 would be top BB groups and other EBs that gets you lower UMM or blue-chip MM as an "average" exit.
Obviously if you're diversity forget about all this, you're basically guaranteed Apollo from places like DB ECM.
I kept thinking this guy is retarded then I read the username
I wish there was a way to block people on this website.
Ironic cause Apollo cares less about diversity than places like BX / KKR
In eveniet enim minus placeat veritatis est inventore. Inventore hic rem sed neque omnis. Repellendus similique reprehenderit ratione tenetur eum sequi. Consequatur dignissimos qui et. Occaecati non explicabo ut sed totam dolorum ipsum.
Ut dolore exercitationem veritatis aut vel dolores consequatur. Non delectus optio non libero odit ut. Cumque aut ullam aut consequatur repellat sit. Quam quia ratione aut aliquam ab reiciendis illo illo. Voluptatum qui autem cumque ex et illo nulla.
Accusamus porro molestiae magni facilis sed tempora. Est amet in totam maiores quia. Qui omnis voluptate omnis blanditiis dolor exercitationem voluptates.
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...
Molestiae corrupti dolorem rerum. At eum aspernatur soluta odit mollitia fugiat et.
Neque rerum voluptatem eos quod. Harum accusantium voluptatem voluptatem quidem. Velit occaecati nemo eligendi quod et ea illum.