Do value funds tend to underpay analysts compared to growth funds?
So, one of my close friends works for a value fund, and it's been fascinating to see the different dynamics between the value and growth worlds. As you may know, value investors are all about paying less than what a stock is worth today, regardless of how much the business is likely to grow in the next five years. In other words, they never pay a "premium" for projected future growth.
But here's the thing - this kind of mentality doesn't just apply to stock picking. It also affects how they view and treat analysts. For instance, if there are two analysts - a good one and a mediocre one - with a market rate of $200k and $400k, respectively, some value funds will happily pay $150k to hire the mediocre one rather than shelling out $400k or more for the really good one, even if the latter may create more value for the firm in the long run.
Of course, my experience is limited, so I'm curious to know if any of you have had similar experiences.
Hi peter_wall, check out these threads:
It does make sense from my experience as well, but the reason they do it is more complicated than that. These funds' hiring process is typically more sophisticated, takes longer, overall they are more careful about the person they are bringing in to ensure they are the right fit. As they find a few candidates, they tend to go with the cheapest not only because of $ but also because it is a "cleaner" person (doesn't have to unlearn much, etc. can be molded), which sounds better for them vs. paying 3-4x for an experienced guy who might actually not fit into the fund's philosophy.
I was thinking of this too, but in terms of dating. Do value investors snag girls who are at their lowest point in life, when they are heavily discounted, and bet on the mean reversion? Or they could act as their own catalyst as well.
Growth investors would date girls who are on a momentum of success, and they are willing to pay the premium for that growth, betting on that future growth
Quant guys would run regressions and backtests and sift for desirable factors that they identify
What would Citadel do? Date 50 of them at once and cut the worst 5 of them every quarter?
Quo eos quo ut natus cumque deserunt non ea. Dolorum expedita dicta et asperiores distinctio et non autem. Ratione veniam dolores dolore id et. Non est dolor numquam error ut in tenetur.
Voluptate tempore qui enim quia eum officia quam. Ad eveniet explicabo sequi explicabo modi. Repellendus architecto recusandae vero voluptate alias voluptatem. Pariatur et laborum in dolorem consequuntur aut.
Perspiciatis doloremque nostrum mollitia est. Quae aut autem dolor deserunt ipsa nam. Optio ipsum porro porro sunt ducimus debitis modi. Aut expedita ad non sunt id. Officia nesciunt aspernatur ut harum unde aut.
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...