Invesco vs Neuberger Bernman for FI APM
Hi all, new to the forum and want to get your opinions on this.
Background:
2 years AM experience at a large traditional shop, but not a direct investment role although work closely with PMs (CPM). CFA level 3, Finance MSc and Econ BA from top UK uni.
Roles:
Assistant PM, fundamental credit, wear hats of credit research, trader and PM. Senior Analyst/ Early Associate level. Assume we take pay/ comp out of the equation.
Question:
Which one would you pick and why? Below are some of my opinions:
NB - Not a very famous brand in comparison, esp amongst new grads or people outside AM, although it is quite elite. I have heard a lot of good things about NB, and the people do seem very nice, motivated team environment. Extremely long and difficult interviews but help candidates to learn their culture well, their office seems a bit run down and Victoria is not ideal. Also heard that progression is difficult, but I feel like it is also the case at my current firm. Management (employee-owned firm, worth saying, so they're essentially partners) is very optimistic, expanding globally and winning mandates for their specialist strategies.
Invesco - Invesco is a 'household name', AUM is 3x of NB's, moving office to SIXTY London wall (pretty decent, the same building with AB and next door to Blackrock). But the firm is struggling lately due to fee compression (which is a good thing IMO, consolidates the industry and shakes out lazy people and mediocre PMs), and runs very generic strategies and is predicted to reduce market share by management (earnings calls). Culture is non-existent, siloed teams, I learned from my contact that the people are very lazy (esp in the ETF product business) and just want to hire someone to do the manual labour so they don't have to, lack a sense of responsibility and people fight for easy/ simple tasks to do and hard tasks are left outstanding (I also sensed this myself).
PS: Hope my first question is posted correctly, pls kindly correct if not.
