Hey everyone, feel like we haven't had a good ol' argument/friendly discussion in a while. What would you say is the current tier list of investment banks in 2016 based on overall brand strength? If you have real balls, rank them with no ties (1a, 1b).
Ranking the Bulge Bracket and Elite Boutique Banks
Before looking at any rankings, it is important to note that these are subjective and can change at any point based on the deal flow at a given bank. These can also vary by group. Below are rankings contributed by our users.
- Tier 1a: Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley
- Tier 1b: JP Morgan
- Tier 2a: Citi, Bank of America/Merrill Lynch, Credit Suisse, Barclays
- Tier 2b: Deutsche Bank
- Tier 3: UBS, Wells Fargo, Nomura, RBC, HSBC
Elite Boutique Investment Banking Rankings
- Tier 1a: PJT, Centerview, Evercore, Qatalyst
- Tier 1b: Lazard, Moelis, Perella Weinberg Partners
- Tier 2: Greenhill, Rothschild, Houlihan Lokey, Guggenheim, Macquarie, Harris Williams, Jefferies
- Tier 3: William Blair, Lincoln International, LionTree, Stifel, Oppenheimer, Peter J. Solomon, Robert Baird, Piper Jaffray
Bulge Bracket Banks Characterized by Sorority Sisters
User @LongIslandBound" shared a humorous post:
Top:
- GS: Catty, rich girls. Lot of coke, hard pledge process. Only mix with Apollo/KKR
- MS: Smaller sisterhood feeding mostly from HYP. Rivals with GS and always try to outdo them in philanthropy
- JPM: Stuck up girls who think they're top but really just spread debt comps all day
Mid:
- BAML: Super diverse, fun sisterhood. Merged with ML girls after they got kicked off campus but everyone still thinks they're just a retail sisterhood.
- Citi: Strong national organization but kind of weak at USA
- Barclays: Sceney international girls who used to party hard but got in trouble with their national organization
- CS: More international girls in trouble with nationals
Bottom:
- Deutsche: Nice girls but got in big trouble for their off balance sheet derivatives philanthropy. Currently on probation with the SEC board
- UBS: Considered the sisters who didn't get bids at any other BB houses. More of a wealth management sisterhood now.
Read More About Rankings on WSO
Read more about this topic on WSO.
Learn more about our users thoughts on the quality of the investment banks in the 2018 Wall Street Oasis Industry Report.
Decided to Pursue a Wall Street Career? Learn How to Network like a Master.
Inside the WSO Finance networking guide, you'll get a comprehensive, all-inclusive roadmap for maximizing your networking efforts (and minimizing embarrassing blunders). This info-rich book is packed with 71 pages of detailed strategies to help you get the most of your networking, including cold emailing templates, questions to ask in interviews, and action steps for success in navigating the Wall Street networking process.
edit: forget it
Deleted
I'd say for tech Qatalyst is Number 1 w/o a doubt. Look at the size and breadth of deals they've been on across internet, software, semis.
Would like to add that the rankings could differ rather drastically from region to region, e.g. U.S. vs Asia / Europe
PJT below Guggenheim makes me question your whole list
I agree with the BB list, although I would add Soc Gen above BMO. Here is m version of the EB
Note: I am a little biased towards the energy space, although if I was 100% talking about energy I would raise Jefferies and Piper Jaffray to to after HL before Moelis, and drop Qatalyst to last.
EB/MM/Boutique: 1. Lazard 2. Evercore 3. HL 4. Moelis 5. Jefferies 6. Centerview 7. PJT 8. Perella Weinberg 9. Qatalyst 10. Piper Jaffray 11. Guggenheim 12. Macquarie
Lol the EB ranking is so bad in general. Another note: Guggenheim, Jefferies, Piper, Macquarie aren't even EBs... Just MM/boutiques for now
This is asked every now and then but what about Energy focused IBs or those that are strong in Energy?
I would imagine Credit Suisse and Goldman Sachs have to be high on the list given the OFS deals they have been involved in this and last year. Any thoughts?
Barclays and Evercore
Energy I would rank as follows This is CURRENT, not Historical, banks which are not strong market leaders can go in and out of vouge in this space very quickly and there is a TON of MD poaching which happens regularly.
EDIT: below list reordered from original content due to information below
EB/Specialist:
the rest do not have a noteworthy energy presence to my knowledge.
.
LOL at MS as number, what a fucking joke. They have like one good MD (Mize). Definitely one of the weakest banks in energy. GS is good but too high. Agree that CS has been killing it this year.
No Guggenheim? They did Great Plains - Westar, among other things, and I believe the entire former BX / PJT team went there after the spin off
the trend will most likely be that US banks will continue to take market share away from Euro banks. Also questionable how the "Elite Boutiques" will do given that we are genuinely post crisis.
http://news.efinancialcareers.com/us-en/249283/graduates-elite-boutique…
Was trying to put together a list of PE placements by BB group but I don't know anything about Citi, DB or UBS groups - anyone know where these guys go?
Thanks
This post makes me think of greekrank
I made an amended list based on what you guys really want: Top: GS: Catty, rich girls. Lot of coke, hard pledge process. Only mix with Apollo/KKR MS: Smaller sisterhood feeding mostly from HYP. Rivals with GS and always try to outdo them in philanthropy JPM: Stuck up girls who think they're top but really just spread debt comps all day Mid: BAML: Super diverse, fun sisterhood. Merged with ML girls after they got kicked off campus but everyone still thinks they're just a retail sisterhood. Citi: Strong national organization but kind of weak at USA Barclays: Sceney international girls who used to party hard but got in trouble with their national organization CS: More international girls in trouble with nationals Bottom: Deutsche: Nice girls but got in big trouble for their off balance sheet derivatives philanthropy. Currently on probation with the SEC board UBS: Considered the sisters who didn't get bids at any other BB houses. More of a wealth management sisterhood now.
This is my favorite. post. ever. dot. period. ever.
I literally can't even.
You deserve infinite bananas
Going down in the annals of WSO history. Gratz bud
Thank you mate, all I ever needed to know is here.
As someone who is an energy banker, Lazard is no where near the top. Probably one of the last places I'd want to work if my goal was to have a career in energy. The brand name helps when recruiting outside the state, but people in energy circles know it's not relevant in the space. They may have done a few decent deals recently, but there are a number of banks consistently doing better and paying much way better. At least two banks come to mind here that have solid deal flow and pay well above NYC street.
If I were looking now, I'd preference CS, Jefferies, Evercore, Barclays, and TPH in no particular order based on a combination of deal flow, compensation, and exit opportunities.
This list is VERY different from general investment banking rankings, as Houston has a very different hierarchy. NYC is a lot more group dependent, so I feel it's not really worth ranking. For what I'm interested in, if I ever switched out of energy, I'd preference PJT, Centerview, Goldman, Evercore, MS, but there's are plenty of top notch groups across other banks in the city as well.
What about Rothschild?
What about Greenhill? I heard they were one of the top elite boutiques?
They've been trending down since Greenhill stepped down in 2007. Do a few large transactions every year, but have been losing MDs left and right. Still a great place in terms of hours / pay / exits, but they definitely don't have the momentum that some other boutiques have.
PJT definitely hasn't changed much since its Blackstone days and I think they still punch above Evercore / Moelis / Lazard in terms of exits. Evercore has increased its analyst class size quite a bit, believe it's above 30 now, and not sure how that has impacted placement. Moelis and Lazard are keeping class sizes in low 20s and placement was great this past cycle. Lazard placement actually varies quite a bit depending on group. Moelis NY was arguably the top placing bank on the street for MF PE this past cycle but that can and does change since they were pretty bad the previous cycle. LA didn't do too well this past cycle and had a few analysts actually lateral to different firms.
In terms of deal experience, it definitely varies quite a bit for the boutiques. Greenhill pretty much focuses on large cap transactions so you might not close anything as an analyst but you'll get great deals on your resume if you do. Centerview and Perella are also like this. Evercore and Lazard have less of a focus on large cap and churn MM deals frequently so you'll have chances to get both deal experience from MM stuff and to get thorough corporate advisory experience. Moelis is kind of an oddball in that they do anything they can get their hands on resulting in many MM deals and sponsor deals. Also unlike other boutiques, they specialize in sell-sides from both corporates and sponsors while others do mainly buy-side stuff. Pros and cons to both the models but think Evercore and Lazard have a good balance.
Compensation wise, Evercore and Moelis are tied for total comp. Lazard is lower by a significant margin - their top bucket bonus for the first years was lower than the bottom bucket bonus for Moelis and Evercore first years.
Good info. As you said Moelis NY absolutely destroyed placements this most recent year but we'll have to see what this coming year is like to see if they still have staying power. Will also be interesting to see where PJT places
Much of this is incorrect. Moelis pays below Evercore - I believe Evercore base salary is $10k higher for first and second years, and bonus was significantly higher this year as well. Also, unless top bucket for Lazard is sub-40k - which I highly doubt - your last comment is also incorrect. How could you possibly know what the bottom bonus given across all Moelis first years was?
I don't mean to sound harsh, I just find that there is too much sharing of incorrect secondhand knowledge on this forum.
Thank you! @zezima
Deleted
People never learn..
Stop with the ranking lists and refer to this thread: http://www.wallstreetoasis.com/blog/david-and-goliath-the-boutique-and-…
-
Wow it's almost like you can rank on many different dimensions (dealflow, exits, long-term prospects, lifestyle, stability, growth) and that's why these threads always have scattershot flow and abounding dissension
Cuz I spit hot fire
+1 SB. How you gonna choke a legend??!
Does anyone know league tables for healthcare investment banks?
ELITE BOUTIQUE RANKING based on EXIT OPPS Tier1: Evercore, Moelis (westcoast offices), Lazard, PJT (eh) Tier 2: PWP, Greenhill, Centerview Partners Tier3: HL, Jefferies Tier4: Piper and Baird of the world
Barclays chemicals has been crushing it.
This is totally hilarious. Kudos.
I'd move CS and BarCap into 1B. Also, these rankings are very dependent on group. For example, in the energy / oil & gas space, banks like Jefferies and RBC RR are very strong for M&A (tier 1), and banks like GS and Lazard are second tier mainly doing capital markets and such.
Do people in the real world care about these lists?
No
People in the real world barely know of/know what GS does much less the rankings of EBs lol
Any girl worth her salt would not even give a UBS or lower ranked the time of day. Choose wisely.
Rank the Banks (Originally Posted: 04/10/2008)
I know there are rankings based on Vault, league tables, etc. However, I want to see how people rank the top 10 investment banks in their own mind. Rankings can be on prestige, deals, etc. Just curious to see how people view the pecking order of the top, lets say 10, banks. I try to avoid the subprime effect and look at deal flow and prestige (and this is just for each banks IB unit).
This is just for fun and curiosity. I know for a fact most people's view of the pecking order is quite different from the official rankings.
Remember, you will always be a salesman, no matter how fancy your title is. - My ex girlfriend
We all know SUN TRUST is the best bank.
I think Citi is a great place to be starting right now, not in terms of prestige but as far as opportunities are concerned. A lean deal team is preferred to an overweight one (JPMorgan?)
ignorance is bliss
Ignoring the tiring nature of these recurring threads for a second, I spoke to some JPM (London) bankers during recruiting in November. I didn't research the veracity of their statements, but they did claim that their LTM revenue was the same as 2000 (or 2001, can't remember) with less than a third of the headcount.
Either way, both NYC and London bankers I spoke to mentioned being stretched hard staffing-wise. Don't know if that's still the case.
This is retarded. By the way, it's the groups and offices that matter. For example, doesn't do you much good if you're part of Lazard 8-man LA office does it?
I agree with yawster, totally depends on the group. Most banks have their all star groups and the ones you wouldn't want to touch with a ten foot pole
Wachovia, #1, all day every day
While they do have #1 Customer Satisfaction, WaMu has a higher rate for Savings. Therefore, WaMu is by far the best bank on the street. And their colors. Cmon!
Really depends on where you are what you're doing. In Europe, DB is considered more prestigious than Lehman for instance. At the end of the day, all of them pay the same amount, they all work you like slaves and they all tell you to get the fuck out after two years.
you guys are honestly retarded. I wish I was busy so I didn't have to read these stupid rants all day long
These rankings are ridiculous. Any ranking is. 6 months ago, many would've put Lehman and Citi in the top 5 with GS/MS and JPM/MER. UBS in the top 5 too? They do a lot of deals but do you want to be part of a place that is considered a total sweatshop and may spin off its IBD unit? Additionally, some groups at lower tier banks are top-notch, like CS with Sponsors/LevFin/Tech, while Tech at UBS stinks. Outside of GS/MS, which are strong pretty much across the board, each bank has its strengths and weaknesses.
Go to the place where you feel will fit you the best. Many of the banks have wildly different atmospheres and people. The deal structure for analysts and workload is also different, so quality of life can range depending on your company and your group. If you think picking UBS is better than Lehman just because some silly ranking told you it was, regardless of group or culture, you are not going to last long in banking.
Do go on about UBS... Are they really known as a sweatshop? You say that their Tech group stinks... Expand upon that for me please.
wow, you guys take this way too seriously. No one is basing their decision of employment off of this, its just for fun. Yes, I know certain groups or locations are better within each bank, but I think you are all smart enough to judge the whole. Think of this as the NFL, sure there are better defensive units on some teams but the team as a whole can still be average (Ravens for example). Quit over thinking such an easy question.
Its just funny, that the children giving their lists are still in college and have no idea what they are talking about. And you guys keep making fun of BB&T or Morgan Keegan, I think you idiots would be lucky to end up there... or anywhere really. You people are the people who give investment bankers the "tool" persona that holds so true across wall street. You are also the same people who will be lonely, pathetic, lifelong principals hating their life.
Agreed that most of these lists are being populated by kids in college. That said, I wouldn't consider anyone lucky (even idiots) to end up at BB&T or Morgan Keegan...
Agreed. But also why is anyone talking about Morgan Keegan 6 years after they were acquired?
Gomes3pc,
Could you elaborate a bit on how the atmosphere differs at each bank? I know that GS is very formal and DB is very relaxed (opposite ends of the spectrum) but I'd be really interested in any additional information that you have. Would do all the prospective monkeys a hell of a lot more good than these retarded rankings.
Thanks!
Hmmm, how do you know that GS is "very formal" and DB is "very relaxed"???
Have you actually worked for an extended period of time at either institution?
Did you spend time in at least 10 different teams and 5 different divisions in each firm?
Did you work for each firm on 5 different continents?
Because if you don't fulfil these rather simple & easy criteria, what qualifies you to say that you actually "know" anything about the atmosphere? Such a generic statement, you crack me up man!
There are too many people talking out of their asses on this site sometimes ........ but at least some of it's humorous.
:)
publicequity,
no offense to you, but I would draw more of a "tool" image of someone who was uptight like that. But your right, rankings are for college kids. I'm sure every coach who ranks football teams in the college coaches poll is a tool also.
Speaking of rankings, just brush up on the Vault list if you need to. The top 10 will always be fairly consistent and carry similar prestige.
Morgan Keegan is #45 on Vault, right behind Gleacher at #44 which is a great company.
you have got to be kidding me? You take yourself too seriously little boy. Also, do you see middle school kids who have no idea what they are talking about giving their football rankings?
Stop arguing. At the end of the day you're all nerds so just hug and make up.
The Official Ranking of Super-Baller Investment Banks and Other Baller Things:
Harvard > Princeton > Yale
NYC > Chicago
BluRay > HD-DVD
This is just for fun. No need to take it more seriously than it deserves.
I'll join in in the spirit of fun.
Wow no love for CS. They were 5th in the US for M&A and 6th worldwide. 2nd in IPOs last year worldwide. Not much of a player in debt but for M&A and equities I'd say they end up a lot better than 9th or 10th.
word
CS deserves some more love
Joefish,
I agree with what you're saying, one of my mentors specifically told me that those kind of generalizations don't really hold true as it is more group and senior banker specific (as you are saying as well). Guess I just momentarily fell into the ibankingoasis trap, thanks for setting me straight.
Yeah I thought CS would be rated a lot higher, they have some strong groups and have managed to stay almost completely out of the news (a pretty good thing these days). Since debt is dead they should be making some big moves.
M&A rankings (not serious!)
How do the US banks rank? (Originally Posted: 12/29/2017)
Found a few posts about this topic but they were quite outdated. Curious as to what the general consensus is as to who are now considered tier 1,2,3 etc for S&T. Also if anyone has any insight on desk specific strengths for each bank that would also be helpful.
Look up "Wall Street League Tables" and click the Business Insider Link
http://www.businessinsider.com/wall-street-league-tables-goldman-sachs-…
rank these mid-market banks (Originally Posted: 10/23/2007)
in terms of prestige and exit opps (for associates)
houlihan goldsmith lazard piper jaffray rbc sagent advisors hsbc bnp paribas
Houlihan HSBC BNP Paribas RBC Piper
I have not heard of the other two.
Lol dude this is so wrong hsbc and bnp are mediocre mm banks in the us... what are you talking about...
Have not heard of Goldsmith Agio or Lazard? That's unusual.
I didn't know Lazard acquired goldsmith agio.
lazard houlihan sagent bnp hsbc rbc piper
same applies here... bnp and hsbc are just mediocre mm banks in the us... no prestige and ex opps
Top Dogs
Houlihan Lazard HSBC
The rest I dont know enough about to rank accurately. Piper is one piece of sh@t company though, lately. No offense to the people who work there...
Weren't you about to buy their stock a few weeks ago?
Houlihan Lokey has the best career video. I could watch it all day long.
HSBC is not a top mm player lol
Haha yes I was, then I looked deeper into the company and found alot of troubling aspects. And they absolutely tanked during Q3, putting the blame on the sub prime losses, just to hide how weak their company truely is. Thank God I didnt take a position with that company.
To give them some credit, I think the stock is way under priced, but until they can get their name out and get some consistent volume they will continue to tank. Some good news in the market (esp financial sector, obviously) will also help the stock price tremendously but who knows when thats going to happen.
And no offense, really, but if you could watch that houlihan career video all day (it's well done, but quite sickening IMO) then you reeeally need a girl/boy friend. :P
I don't know what it is, I just get a kick out of it. You've got the rock and roll music playing along, and Jeff W.'s voice is going all over the place. "But we'll be paying you." Great line, cracks me up.
how does cowen fall into these rankings?
hlhz is easily the best
haha i just watched the hlhz video but was disappointed..
Are these responses serious or does nobody here actually know what they are talking about?
On what criteria are you ranking these firms? Essentially, each firm is different and has a distinct focus.
For boutique "pure" advisory : Greenhill and Gleacher are far and away the best "boutiques." Perella Weinberg follows close behind. Than comes sagent advisors (top heavy firm with a median age of probably 60, Evercore Partners is a great firm but has an advisory, middle market, and technology focus.
For middle market : goldsmith lazard is clearly the best followed by houlihan (which is the butt of many jokes on Wall Street as a shit firm). Piper Jaffay is decent in middle market equities, but not much else.
The IB departments of rbc, hsbc, and BNP are divisions of international banks so while they are inferior to their BB counterparts, they do have regional clout.
Not sure exactly where Cowen and T. H. Lee Partners falls. Anyone else know? Preferably not some undergrad who thinks because he reads the WSJ he is hot shit.
My take:
Houlihan (great restructuring group, ok-ish for the rest) Piper jaffray Goldsmith lazard (recently acquired by Lazard, doesn't mean that it will have the same exit opps as Lazard proper) hsbc bnp paribas RBC
What's Sagent?????
Sagent is a new middle market boutique formed by the heads of the M&A group at DLJ.
Evercore does not have a technology focus, although they did do some big telecom deals. They also don't have a middle market group or focus anywhere.
New Banking Ratings (Originally Posted: 09/19/2006)
New vault ratings on vault.com were released. While glancing over the list, it makes me realize how absurd this concept is of ranking a banks "prestige." Terrible methodology...
The audience for this type of service is primarily junior bankers, and so many factors are involved that influence what you get in terms of career/training/satisfaction for what you give up (your social life). Oh well, that's my rant, hope to hear what other people think while I get back to spreading comps.
it helps those who aren't on Wall Street...i.e. 90% of those investment banks on that list, a typical person never heard about.
What are you talking about? Why would a typical person not on wall street give a shit about the vault rankings?
Man, Vault really knows how to fuck it up. They think it's easier to get a job at Lazard than at Lehman, Merrill, etc.? Give me a break.
The Vault rankings are based on surveys - it has nothing to do with how easy it is to get a job at a given bank.
I knew some fucking Poindexter would say something like this. Selectivity is a huge factor in prestige, as are exit opps. I have no idea how those surveys were carried out, but there's OBVIOUSLY something fishy about it.
I like how Evercore is killing it right now but barely cracks the top 30...
all rankings are shit
Newest Vault Rankings for Banks (Originally Posted: 08/10/2008)
2009 RANK FIRM SCORE 2008 RANK HEADQUARTERS 1 Goldman Sachs & Company 2 The Blackstone Group
3 Morgan Stanley
4 Lehman Brothers 5 J.P. Morgan Investment Bank 6 Merrill Lynch
7 Lazard
8 Credit Suisse's Investment Banking Business 9 Deutsche Bank
10 UBS Investment Bank
11 Citi Institutional Clients Group
12 Chase Commercial Bank
13 Greenhill & Co.
14 Barclays Capital
15 Rothschild
16 Bear Stearns*
17 Bank of America 18 Wachovia Corporation
19 Citi Consumer Banking
20 HSBC North America Holdings 21 Houlihan Lokey
22 Royal Bank of Scotland
23 Perella Weinberg Partners
24 Jefferies & Company
25 Evercore Partners
http://www.vault.com/nr/finance_rankings/finance_rankings.jsp?finance20…
I would place Lehman at least behind JPM and ML.
www.sharpeinvesting.com
Just wondering. What are the general thoughts on the accuracy of these rankings?
I agree with the "prestige" through the first ten (except JPM, which should be higher). After that it's all over the place, and I'd add that senior bankers likely have different views than junior bankers (for various reasons).
commercial banks do not belong in the top 10
i have to say i love the fact that UBS, lehman and Citi are still in the top 11 (had to move up to 11 to include UBS), even though Lehman is as of now worth nothing, citi is more than screwed, and ubs is looking to sell off their ibanking division. Also how the hell is Chase commercial bank prestigious...isn't that like working as a teller?
jw, why is everyone always so down on Citi, judging by the amount and size of the deals they have done it seems to be they should be a top bank.
...there aren't any pure commercial banks in the top ten. And commercial banking isn't the same as retail banking.
oh ya and also when speaking with senior bankers at most firms prestige rankings normally do not matter, its more of the prestige of an indviual department within a firm versus an overall firm (although Goldman obviously is known as highly prestigious due to the number of amazing teams they have), i.e. some of the richest bankers within the investment banking community work at second tier banks (i.e. the highest paid banker in europe is a private equity tax specialist at Barcap)
Lehman shouldn't be in the top 10 in my opinion
boutiques arent really ranked fairly in my opinion. is there anyone who would honestly take Chase Commerical bank, banc of america or Wachovia over Perella Weinberg or Evercore?
CS seems pretty low there. I know they're a bit smaller than some of the guys ahead of them, but they came out pretty darn squeaky from the credit crisis and are picking up some top MDs from Lehman and Merrill as they jump ship.
This list is total bullshit. Also, who gives a shit about balance sheet strength? A good team is a good team, regardless of the losses on their trading desk.
Just to make some points about some peoples comments on here......
None of the banks listed are listed because of commercial banking except where noted (that being citibank commercial banking). As a fellow poster noted commercial banking is not retail.... you are not a teller... you are actually providing banking services for corporations. I am not completely well versed on this area but I would look into it before making comments about it.
Again as a previous poster pointed out group prestige is much more important than "brand" prestige. Lehman has had one of the top natural resources groups on the street. Other banks have a niche in some particular industry or product primarily due to the relationships that have been created by the MDs with certain corporate clients.
Lastly.. stop judging banks solely by the subprime market situations. That would be like someone judging you for the actions someone at your college did. Even worse, its specific groups of individuals at these banks that have caused problems and typically this does not involve the investment banking (M&A advisory) businesses at all. Lehman as a whole is a very good and prestigious bank.... they might be going through a rough time due to the debt markets and investments in certain real estate... Citi has done extremely well building their investment banking division and continues to do well despite some misteps by individuals at their bank causing problems
FYI - these rankings mean next to nothing...they are put out to up Vault's readership. Use these rankings only to get a very rough idea of which firms are well-regarded in the industry, nothing else.
These are prestige rankings; not quality rankings. As a parallel, any person could argue that MIT is just as good a school as is Harvard (in terms of education provided), but the prestige of Harvard is definitely greater. Just as Merrill might be just a good a bank as is Goldman (in terms of quality of product), but the prestige of Goldman is definitely higher.
I've found that people who are adamantly against rankings usually harbor some type of insecurity complex regarding their current bank (i.e., the Citi banker above me whose bank ranking dropped 5 spots this year...)
I've worked at [what some college kids would naively call] "tier 1" banks as well as a bank ranked between 3-10. The work and everything else one would experience at the junior level is about the same, but the attitude and swagger exhibited definitely are not [Goldman kids are the absolute most arrogant people you will ever meet]. People recognize the prestige differences b/w banks, and anyone who denies this is just a wee bit insecure.
I've noticed that, even in banking (not just in college) there seems to be an industry-wide insecurity complex towards GS (at least at the junior level).
I should note, however, that people above arguing that "Lehman should be ranked 5 instead of 4" or "Merrill should be at 4 instead of 6" are probably the most retarded people in the world and likely have never before stepped foot in a bank.
Disagree. Think someone from HSBC has more swagger than someone from Evercore?
I'm all about the prestige rankings when they reflect the way it is (I think USNews rankings are surprisingly good at this for example). But this one is almost as worthless as the top undergrad b-school rankings.
I'm not impressed with Evercore, and I doubt the general public is either. It's like comparing Carleton, which people "in the know" would argue is a better school than schools such as Notre Dame or Emory, but the prestige of ND/Emory in terms of the general public is still greater than that of Carleton.
In my experience people at Goldman have been less arrogant then Lehman
Pointless debate, but I think Citi and Deutsche guys are way high on the arrogance scale.
I've spoken with people at all different banks. I thought that the Citi and Deutsche guys were the most down to earth. Keep in mind, culture usually varies by group so try not to compare someone in DB M&A to someone in MS Power. Not apples to apples.
This Thread is meaningless, use the damn search function.
http://modernyuppie.blogspot.com/ The musings and antics of a Meathead college wrestler turned asset backed securities trader.
Most overrated investment bank (Originally Posted: 03/29/2011)
Which investment bank is overrated?
I'll start: Piper Jaffray. Everyone in here keeps defending it saying it's good in MM health care or some shit. No, it's Piper Jaffray, and it's for losers.
GS is not really overrated - it's rated just right because it is one of the most baller places you can work at.
You're absolutely right, compared to KKR and Blackstone, GS is not overrated. :D
fuck you duke of duke. nice try with the name change. your a trolllllllllll
Nice try with YOUR name change, Matt Damon. Fuck you, the pinnacle of the last 3 years your life was a TV show.
dude to be honest there are about 30-40 places I would be indifferent about working at and could list them at will
and now someone needs to close this topic
"I like to butt f*ck fine ladies. Will I chokehold a bitch? Well, maybe."
Listen here you beautiful bitch, I'm about to fuck you up with some truth.
-Kenny Powers
Wtf you're a fucking disgusting homo, and you prob can't even fit that shit in your mouth in the first place.
How, specifically, is Piper Jaffray overrated?
This is why:
When in actuality the whole firm is a complete jooooke (and a funny one at that).
trolling aside i also think Piper Jaffray is a good MM
The trolls have eaten.
all the troll stuff on PJ has to stop
BarCap
BARCAP
FARTMAN
these type of threads need to be deleted sooner
seriously, get a job before you start blasting well-established firms like Piper... you wouldn't even get an offer at a strong MM bank like Piper Jaffray
agreed, the trolling has to stop on this firm
rank these banks (Originally Posted: 10/07/2008)
Wellsman Sachs Citigan Stanley Merrill of America JP Stearns
...of course, in terms of prestige.
and, just to humor kingbling, you can include Barclehs Capital if you want, though we all know where on the bottom of the list that bank will fall.
duh
What is your basis for ranking these banks in this order? The past? The future? Just a few months ago, many ranked Lehman Bro #2.
haha, I love the "duh". I hope some insecure Morgan Stanley kids jump all over you.
I like all the combined names. That's the last time I refer ti Citi as anything but Citigan Stanley, even if the merger doesn't happen.
Who ranked Lehman #2? retards, that's who [kingbling, where are you?!]. that's why those guys no longer have a job!
Didn't you once say that Merrill would be the top #1/#2 bank on the street? Look how that turned out...
My rank is based on my opinion of each banks ability to survive plus my personal prestige premium.
As it stands, MS cannot survive without deposits (assuming that nobody in their right mind will make an equity investment). What's so prestigious about barely surviving? - I believe that MS will either be taken over by Citi or go under. So, best case scenario: MS gets Citi's prestige rating and moves to the bottom of my list.
On the other hand, I believe GS will continue to receive capital from investors or will eventually purchase a commercial bank. Essentially, it will survive on its own. - And given its already prestigious image, I believe it will benefit by picking up talent from Bear/Lehman/Merrill/MS layoffs.
JPM is by far the biggest beneficiary IMO (a close 2nd). It has picked up intellectual property/deposits/employees at pennies on the dollar. It is now a very stable and safe place to be employed. Plus, their IB/Trading operations will increase in value because of these acquisitions. - BTW JPM already has one of the best S&T programs on the street.
And I ranked BAC above Citi simply because I believe BAC's financial situation is better than Citi's. One may argue that MS > MER - But I believe this is outweighed by Citi's earlier problems.
So,
1 - GS - 9+10 = 19
2 - JPM - 10+8.5 = 18.5
3 - BAC - 9+7 = 16
4 - Citi - 7+8.5 = 15.5
The first digit being ability to survive... the second digit being my personal prestige premium.
equal last.
The question is like "rank these turds in the order of most deliciousness"
b2 you are retarded, and chill the fuck out. just because i have more important things to do then argue with you about prestige rankings, doesnt mean ive disappeared.
no one on this forum actually believes you work in the industry
you make about 100 posts on day on WSO and all of them are useless
regardless of which, 1. you were indeed clamoring weeks and months prior that MER would be the top 1-3 bank. they will no longer exist very soon. 2. second, i dont work at lehman or Barclays. and just so you know, every lehman intern in IBD that got offers received an offer to work at barclays... no one is out of a job there 3. you can rank barclays however you want. no one cares what you think. personally, ive never ranked lehman in the top of your useless list anyways
all you've proven is how much of a retarded douche you are
hahahahahahhahahahhahahha, pwnD! gg,nore!
Prediction of Bank Rankings: next 2, 5, 10 yrs? (Originally Posted: 12/07/2012)
Lots of changes hitting the banking industry, and some BBs going through tough times.
How do we see the top 10 rankings changing (if at all) over the next decade? Who are positioned to be winners and losers?
If we knew that the banks were going to perform well/poorly in the future wouldn't that be factored into their rankings right now?
this is all speculative, so I assume people will have different opinions?
My own prediction: RBC + Wells will be in top 10. In fact, I think RBC is already Top 10 this year, which makes them de-facto Bulge Bracket.
I don't think anyone would really consider RBC a bulge bracket bank
I will be interested to see what the future holds for places like RBS and UBS- both significantly trimming down their operations in IB, but focusing in areas where they have historically done well. Lots of this all will depend on the state of the European economies- the UK specifically (looking at RBS and Barclays)
I think WF is doing all the right things and agree with Bruce Wayne that they will move up the ranks.
Regards
Yeah I agree with both you guys. They are already real high on a few league tables.
They are a great firm and have been performing well recently, but bulge status is arguably more indicative of perspective and cachet than recent performance.
I think we see a big shift towards wealth management/ private banking. Not to say IB will go the way of dinosaurs, but Dodd-Frank and tough Basel rules will push banks towards operations that are less capital intensive.
Dolorem id facere dolorem harum at. In nesciunt qui quae excepturi eos velit. Architecto unde aperiam earum atque iusto nemo laboriosam adipisci.
Optio illo et natus quam. Est quis dignissimos totam qui beatae repellat aliquid. Quia non vero sed magni atque ad numquam. Velit maxime ab voluptate et facilis minus.
Aut iusto voluptatum non beatae. Inventore sit repellat rem velit animi repellat. Ut tempore omnis voluptatum laboriosam nam esse. Repellendus qui occaecati vero quis qui dolorem. Odio consequatur est maxime.
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...
Harum repellat natus praesentium odio. Fugiat amet illum enim eveniet aut omnis ullam. Reprehenderit fugiat et molestiae modi est.
Et incidunt facilis aspernatur quas accusantium. Aut aut laborum sit et iure.
Quam nam sit laboriosam nulla. Asperiores ipsa vel placeat voluptas omnis sint. Sunt nemo quidem adipisci quidem suscipit eius quia. Officiis sit ut occaecati recusandae ex sit. Excepturi facere et suscipit et commodi.
Ipsa perferendis dolor optio pariatur sed quam omnis. Odit voluptatem suscipit velit corrupti.
Suscipit qui dicta quis est. Sit sint dolorem aut a omnis ipsam voluptatem quaerat. Esse possimus numquam perspiciatis similique consectetur. Corrupti asperiores nesciunt fugiat expedita deserunt cumque. Non voluptatem minus ut et similique consequatur velit.
Consequatur molestiae repellendus voluptas at inventore pariatur dicta delectus. Quia provident ea corporis optio excepturi tenetur. Eveniet et aut ipsum eius hic non ipsa. Quibusdam aliquid explicabo nulla dignissimos. Suscipit error non quia quia delectus.
In qui rerum sit itaque et et cumque. Incidunt quia voluptas nisi et eum. Et enim dolorem enim sed possimus eaque. Veritatis voluptatem ea debitis et eos fugiat tempore. Quo dolore quaerat voluptatem sapiente ut temporibus explicabo quia. Et fugit quia quo officiis beatae.
Et corrupti perferendis et ea sunt perspiciatis voluptate. Voluptatibus tempore consequatur inventore ea laudantium.
Veniam in dolores necessitatibus libero non qui. Adipisci voluptatibus ex voluptates velit ullam nihil. Fugiat ut nihil nesciunt veritatis natus iusto sed.
Ullam aut eos quia eum quia repellat. Dicta et eos sint culpa et.
Neque sunt unde est consequuntur. Quia nam quam et vero. Quibusdam totam nam sed. Expedita ut odit officiis dicta itaque consectetur. Porro dignissimos maxime sint iure.
Fugit dicta amet ea. Totam quos eveniet et blanditiis laborum soluta. Quam dolores rerum natus placeat.
Dolorem cupiditate enim impedit totam qui. Quidem accusamus consequatur necessitatibus et dolorum maxime. Dolorem hic voluptatem voluptatum. Rerum nisi asperiores ad error.
Perspiciatis aliquam impedit ab expedita asperiores enim. Et autem vitae vitae deleniti ipsam quidem.
Expedita molestiae temporibus qui perferendis accusantium. Quam quas omnis est iste vel. Facere explicabo est eveniet rerum cumque nam. Blanditiis explicabo et velit iste. Nobis saepe animi consectetur non facilis nemo. Sed sint et voluptate quae.
Quia error qui occaecati ratione. Et minima voluptas omnis corrupti cum enim impedit. Deserunt voluptates voluptas quo magnam. Excepturi tempore quia veritatis blanditiis. Rerum eum ut ab accusamus.
Earum quae qui illum sint repellendus placeat. Repellendus mollitia et velit corrupti. Earum inventore pariatur a sit voluptates.
Quibusdam incidunt quidem inventore eius pariatur ratione provident harum. Est est ipsam in aspernatur vel et. Vitae adipisci saepe accusantium soluta illo dolore. Iusto laboriosam nulla rerum.
Cupiditate deleniti minima nisi quaerat ut in. Expedita velit enim quaerat aut. Hic voluptatem labore et sit et aliquid in. A consectetur consequuntur assumenda aspernatur tempore ullam qui quia.
Ad voluptatem aut accusamus saepe accusantium officia eligendi. At et aut sint soluta sed voluptas blanditiis. Nihil harum delectus molestiae reprehenderit voluptatem sint.
Sed consequuntur modi consequatur aut rerum ex facilis. Aut fugit nihil sunt quis. Fugiat voluptas sed sequi excepturi placeat quia aut. Quos ea perspiciatis assumenda ducimus. Aspernatur ut quia fuga amet perspiciatis.
Voluptatem excepturi nulla sit voluptas delectus dolores id. Sint impedit omnis quis assumenda. Sunt non non voluptates. Hic ipsum eaque possimus necessitatibus beatae ullam voluptatem.
Laudantium sunt nulla repellendus ipsum. Magni dolores et voluptatem autem odio totam. Qui nihil soluta nobis aliquam dolor eligendi provident. Quos libero rerum possimus et repellat. Aut voluptatem corporis doloribus hic nesciunt. Qui doloribus iste autem dolores magnam voluptates praesentium.
Iusto dolore fuga repudiandae consequatur qui doloremque sapiente. Hic minima rerum reprehenderit qui esse.