Can someone make a LO AM tier list?
Seems like on the IB forum people are making prestige rankings every day. I know those get shit on, but they've actually been very helpful to me as an undergrad in terms of understanding where each firm falls in the ecosystem. It would be helpful to get a better picture of the reputations of different firms in AM, and I haven't been able to find anything comprehensive on this forum.
As I understand it, firms like Fidelity, Wellington, D&C, and RCG fall in the top tier. But which firms are a notch below? How would places like Weiss / Putnam / Brandes / Third Avenue rank? Who's in the middle tiers? Where do BB AM groups land? I'm approaching this from the perspective of an undergrad looking for summer internship experience.
-
Actually Putnam prob on par with fidelity
Same with Dodge and Cox. Top tier shop but very few spots even compared to the others I believe
I have heard that Putnam has not done so well recently
dude why even take a stab if you know nothing about the industry?
Well, now he bout to get stabbed - ie. MS'ed.
Can't comment on a lot of the firms you've mentioned, but in my mind, "Tier 1" includes Fidelity, Wellington & BlackRock.
Haven't dealt with them much, but Wellington strikes me as an extremely well run operation. BlackRock have unparalleled scale, although I've heard mixed things about the culture.
Honestly, when it comes to interning I don't think it matters *that* much. Although very superficial, one way you can kind of judge an AM is by the performance of its own stock price. There are a handful of AM's whose stock has eaten shit and in many respects, this reflects the state of the company.
Fair to argue that BLRK tier 1 by some measure. Not sure if it is for employment opportunities….
Forgive my ignorance but what kind of active stuff does blackrock do? I know them by ishares
Agreed
Like.. everything. equities, FI, RE, PE, quant etc
Cap Group, Fidelity, Wellington, T Rowe, Dodge & Cox are all top notch.
This is right for equities. These are the best of the best in terms of overall experience and reputation.
Who would you put in the tier below them?
Prob everyone else
This is the correct answer
Ok
agree, would also add Lord Abbett into the t1 mix
Who?
Can anyone shed some light on RCG? They sent out a recruitment flyer to clubs at my school and seems like everyone got dinged.
They’re GOAT
They have very few spots in a given year (sometimes none) and pretty much only give offers at a handful of top schools, so that would make sense
Yea solid place. Prob different category in terms of investors. Other places are kinda just like prestigious general employers like the Goldman Sachs. Rcg more like actual investors in my humble opinion
didnt sequoia blew up a few years ago lol
Kinda. Maybe you are referencing the valeant investment? Fund I think has been around for something like 100 years maybe. Probably has made some big mistakes in the past like vrx and may make mistakes like that again in future but overall is still probably regarded as a respected, good, quality fund imho
Could anyone give any insights on how working for Banks, Pure-play & Insurer AMs would differ?
T Rowe is likely considered in that top tier. Invesco is too passive, so likely closer to the middle of the pack. I don’t know enough about Amundi.
In terms of BB AM, JPM AM is highly regarded. They probably belong in that second tier. However, the others are not as great as independent AM shops IMO.
This overall good. Trowe prob on par with fidelity. Jpam can be there but Might be hit or miss. Prob overall is on par but sometimes can be a bit lower maybe idk
Could you elaborate on T Rowe please?
What about Morgan Stanley investment management?
maybe cap, rcg, d&c, well for tier 1
This has been well covered before (See: https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/top-asset-management-firms). It's very hard to rank large AMs as their forte varies by asset class and strategies. However, have recruited intensely for large AM undergrad seats for a while and the general consensus across the street (including culture, comp, and difficulty to land a seat) is:
Equities:
1. Capital Group, Wellington, Fidelity, BlackRock, Dodge & Cox, T. Rowe, GMO (top value shop)
2. Putnam, Amundi, Franklin Templeton
Fixed-Income:
1. PIMCO (in a league of their own)
2. TCW/DoubleLine/Nuveen/BlackRock/PGIM
What is the comp progression for the large Ams?
In fundamental buy-side equity research roles directly out of undergrad at one of the Tier 1 shops above, this was my comp progression:
Year 1: $85 + 20K bonus
Year 2: $90 + 45K bonus
Year 3: $115 + $75K bonus
Analyst (expected): $275K + 100-150% bonus
My PM this past year: $10M
Partner: The moon
I think the other poster might be in a bit of an exceptional position. I am in fixed income so my numbers might be slightly lower, but I think much more realistic comp progression is:
85-95k first 3 years, 25-50% bonus
100-150k 3-6 years, 25-50% bonus
Around this time you might get promoted to analyst
150-200k, 50-100%+ bonus
I would also put harris associates in the top tier for equities.
Would add MFS to the above lists on either tier 1 or 2- flies under the radar a bit but I believe AUM is same ballpark as Wellington. Know some senior people there that absolutely rake in comp.
Sounds fair. MFS prob on par with the tier 1 guys though likely more under the radar in my humble perspective
Do you know what the comp progression is at MFS? What did the people you know there bring home?
Where would Artisan Partners sit?
Any insights on insurer GA/in house investment team ranking? LO IG fixed income investments.
do you mean like allocators or legit in-house investment management teams?
Yes, specifically insurance in house investment arm that are investing premiums from insurance products in LO fixed income, not mutual fund investment team. Thanks.
interested as well. He's referring to shops like MetLife IM, NYLAM, TIAA/Nuveen, etc.., PGIM
Yeah I'd also be interested how these rank. Relative to each other, are they all in a similar tier? Are any particularly strong / weak? How do they stack up to a Franklin Templeton / TCW type shop?
Bump
This will obviously depend on what company you are at as some insurers are more reputable than others. I think this is not a bad place to start but have anecdotally heard it can be more ALM driven and not as much actual investing and analysis as a actual AM team would be.
anyone have an opinion on what's a good AuM per head for a top LO?
>.75bn/investment professional imo. not sure how this would size up to others opinions though so curious to hear from more people.
Firm I work at is in that ballpark, just over $1b per IP (analysts, traders, PMs)
PIMCO has 2.2 trillion with ~600 IPs is $3.6bn per head including research analysts. FI fees are less but damn the comp must be crazy at the partner level.
What's even crazier is that their MD's split 30% of PIMCO's profit with Allianz. It's probably the LO fund with the highest profit per head at the senior levels.
.
Good effort, but there’s a few I would change. Wellington and T Rowe Price are in tier 1 without question. They both make arguments for the best period.
I would move Ark invest down to low end of two, maybe tier 3.
Switch MFS and Brandes. I think Brandes is a good shop, but from what I’ve seen their performance has been subpar over longer periods of time. Strong brand though.
Way off bro…if you’re not familiar with the landscape why make a list? Putting Wellington in tier 2 and Ark in tier 1 seems pretty laughable. I would also add that this whole “closet indexer” jab as a sales pitch for smaller firms is misguided and exhibits a lack of understanding of what these firms actually do IMO.
The fact that you put Artisan and Wellington outside Tier 1 shows you don't know what you're talking about. Further, Ark? Really? GTFOH
What's everyone's beef with ark? I've heard their returns are good but also seen people say they are kind of like bubble/hype investors. Wood seems like a fairly smart person who made a pretty good call on TSLA, but idk enough about her to really pass judgement.
D&C has had a pretty shitty run for the last decade or more - just check their fund performance. Capital Group with all due respect is a closet indexer (2.3T AUM - you have to) and performance for most funds has been suggestive of that, as is obviously Blackrock and Fidelity (both FMR and FIL, though FMR tends to have a better reputation and less turnover). Ark, you mean the "disruptive tech" a la Softbank ETF provider?
MFS, T.Rowe is no worse or better than Fidelity, Wellington or Capital Group in terms of quality or process of research. I know people who work at those shops and let's just say I'm fairly familiar with the way they structure their teams/process. They all think they're super different but when you do a head-to-head comparison it's like comparing different flavors of chocolate ice-cream.
Since you're going to pretty much do the same kind of analysis at all of those shops, I'd just focus on the staying power and economics. Generally, the bigger the fund (and better the flows) the better the staying power, because they clearly know something about distribution, which is the lifeblood in this business. You get paid for AUM, so your job as an analyst is to put in good enough performance to mitigate outflows and help your distribution people sell better. As long as you keep your fees steady and closet index, your total revenue is going to grow at whatever the market is growing, sometimes 10-20% p/a. Not bad, if you ask me!
The economics is very easy to figure out. (AUM * Average Fees)-Fixed Costs = profit formula for a typical asset manager. Suffice to say places like D&C or CapGroup or Brandes with partnership structures are on average better deals for top employees than places where your comp falls strictly under the fixed costs bucket like Fidelity (would love to be Abby Johnson though...). People tend to like dividing profit over investment headcount, which is a good calculation to start with, but I can tell you from firsthand accounts that the distribution of $$$ in a partnership setup is anything but equal - even among partners.
This is a great comment with fantastic insight into a fundamental characteristic of this business. Great job breaking it down; out of curiosity, do you personally have an opinion on if it's better (from a career perspective) to work at a mega manager or "boutique?" More specifically pertaining to the economic scaling as a product of AUM you already mentioned. Naturally, huge managers (TRowe, Fido, etc) have more total AUM so people could get the potentially wrong idea that you will inherently get paid more here; beyond the AUM or Profit / investment professional headcount metric, what else would you bring up as identifying characteristics?
Could someone post a list specific to London? I've looked up Wellington on Google Maps and their building looks very small. Are there any large AM firms that are mainly operating out of London?
Lmao are u srs ur going off of building size from Google maps
How does Vanguard place
What does vanguard do on the active management side?
Their active funds are all outsourced to Wellington
They are actually one of the largest active manager. Fixed income and quant equity group are both active. Plus money to Wellington and prime cap
Nobody mentioned Causeway yet? A good company.
Does anyone know anything about BNYIM? They're in the top 10 when it comes to AUM but I hear almost nothing about them on this forum.
For Equity Mutual Funds:
Tier 1: Capital Group, Fidelity, T. Rowe, Wellington
Tier 2: MFS, Dodge & Cox, JP Morgan AM, Brown Advisory, Janus, Franklin Templeton, First Eagle, Artisan, Goldman Sachs AM, Morgan Stanley IM
Tier 3: Invesco, Putnam, Bernstein, Columbia, Eaton Vance, Federated, Oppenheimer, Lord Abbett, TIAA, Nuveen, Neuberger Berman
Tier 4: The Boston Company, Calamos, Loomis Sayles, Amundi Pioneer
What’s your opinion on Ruane Cunniff?
How would people place the big fixed income managers like PIMCO on here?
Why would you put Calamos so low? Their performance has been pretty darn good
I've only commented on places where I know at least one person, but Ruane seems like a decent boutique shop. Some pretty legit people running the investment committee, so could be good assuming you would work on their Sequoia Fund. That said, the fund has underperformed the S&P by about 3% annually on a 10 year basis and outperformed by just 1% annually on a 5 year basis. Of course, they claim to have a "value-oriented" approach and value has been out of favor for quite some time... so perhaps their performance is superior to many value funds. Not going to try to "tier" rank it, but looks like a good place.
can only comment on funds with people I know... the ones I think are good: Artisan, BAMCO, Loomis sayles, TIAA, American century, Fred Alger
Any thoughts on Invesco?
PIMCO's the fixed income power shop. Their partners (100) split 30% of the firm's profits so extremely lucrative if you make it to that level.
2013 - the top 30 partners pulled $33 million a head. Of course, this is the top 1% of the firm. But a 1% chance at making this sort of money is certainly far better than joining a large corporate.
Vel sed porro sunt harum eaque. Ut aliquid fuga quasi et. Dolor voluptates dolorum enim quia minus et. Quos eos ullam eveniet sed nesciunt et est. Sit harum voluptatem voluptate est non maiores.
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...
Itaque minus voluptate eius eos deserunt corporis. Est quo ad qui at consectetur.
Ut minima laboriosam error dignissimos fugiat. Aut est et quod aut optio qui voluptatem. Nostrum qui rerum eum mollitia. Officiis provident ex facilis nulla repudiandae eveniet id. Non officiis deserunt sunt quis eum.
Et doloremque pariatur aperiam. Aut nemo et voluptate aliquam excepturi nihil veritatis sapiente. Animi dicta et ipsa ea harum vitae. Facilis enim voluptatem recusandae et. Suscipit sequi officiis doloribus sunt sunt quae corrupti. Ipsum aut quo nobis voluptates.
Nulla consequatur odio ea accusantium repudiandae error occaecati. Atque veniam recusandae occaecati voluptatum ea dolorem est. Eius ut et quis ut.
Ut quaerat vel dolorum id beatae et ut quos. Aliquam sunt atque ut sit autem. Soluta aspernatur similique ad neque quidem rem. Dicta consequatur quia et rerum similique dolor. Mollitia quia quo ut. Dolores quo in voluptatum aut doloribus est asperiores amet. Animi doloribus odit at qui.
Officiis pariatur totam doloremque nobis. Dolores qui reprehenderit tempora consequuntur. Incidunt enim illo dolorum quidem.
Cum rerum minima nobis eos aut totam sit. Cupiditate aut eos neque aut fuga omnis fugiat quis. Porro veniam voluptatem ipsum sit quas repellat. Ut error cum velit sit sequi deserunt et id. Nemo quisquam enim quisquam fugit.
Est repellendus necessitatibus repudiandae est harum. Ut ducimus laborum tempora non voluptatum nemo. Sint et rerum itaque perspiciatis ut ratione. Amet velit iure aliquam repellat. Perspiciatis labore dicta dolore molestiae ullam laudantium eius voluptatum. Error sed voluptatum aut repudiandae blanditiis. Quia sunt dignissimos soluta modi.
Laudantium assumenda illum earum recusandae qui adipisci porro. Assumenda ullam tempora quis ipsum accusantium consequuntur omnis voluptas.
Consectetur doloribus ducimus sint non eligendi illum fugit. Tempora dolores distinctio voluptatem. Inventore quos nisi tempore facere enim. Maxime sint aut corrupti quisquam aut exercitationem possimus. Voluptatem perspiciatis aspernatur ut est.
Qui qui consequatur neque. Voluptate enim eos dolores nisi ad quos sint. Eligendi quis maxime aut natus.