Taking a Full time role in adjacent industry vs FTC in desired industry?
Hey Monkeys,
Going to ask this q in the context of london so please bear that in mind. Don't want to doxx myself so will leave it purposely vague. In short, I would value perspectives and opinions on coosing between taking a full time role in Investment Consulting (allocating assets for pension schemes, think LCP, Barnett Waddingham, Mercer, Hymans Robertson etc) compared to a 12 month fixed term contract in equity investments at a boutique Long-only (Capital Group, Baillie Gifford, Stewart Investors etc) go someone who wants to be an investor long-term.
To give more details, I'm a recent graduate from a target uni (ox/cam/imp/lse) and have 6 months SS FT ER experience. I want to become an investor long-term and the hiring market has been extra cooked for grads this year, but have managed to get 2 final rounds for processes, one for a LO equities role and one for an Investment Consulting FT role. Whilst I haven't got either offer yet, I want to ask on which position works better for me to achieve my goal of being an investor. Whilst the IC role is FT, it's asset allocation, client facing (interacting with pension scheme and asset allocator trustees) and doesn't include manager or fund research, and the LO is 12 months without potential to extend. The things I am thinking about is if I take the IC role, do I close the door on becoming an investor? Most recent exits from this IC have been to solutions, IR, client solutions etc type functions from what I can see in the past 3 years. I'm not too worries about comp at this stage since I don't think it's a huge factor this early into my career, but worry more about the trade off between doing a FTC in what I want to do long term but then have to rerecruit 12 months in (and have a CV that reads 6 months in 1 job and then 12 months in a FTC role), vs the trade off of spending 2ish years at the IC, studying for the CFA but having recruiters turn their nose up at my profile because it's harder for them to convince investment shops to consider me. Overall feeling very unsure and whilst any job in this market would be amazing, I want to make sure I'm considering all angles on what the ideal situation would be. I really don't want to go back to do a masters/ MBA either as I'm from a working/ lower middle class family and don't have the luxury of paying for it for reasons I won't go into.
Tl;dr, should I take a 12 month FTC in LO equities or a FT role in IC? Do I screw my chances of being an investor if I take the IC role? Would appreciate any insights
Based on the most helpful WSO content, here's what you need to consider:
Long-Term Career Alignment:
If your ultimate goal is to become an investor, the 12-month fixed-term contract (FTC) in long-only equities aligns more directly with your aspirations. Even though it's not permanent, it provides relevant experience in equity investments, which is crucial for building a career as an investor. The IC role, while full-time, is more client-facing and focused on asset allocation, which may not provide the direct investment experience you need. Exits from IC roles often lead to solutions or client-facing roles, which could make it harder to pivot into an investment-focused career later.
Perception of Fixed-Term Contracts:
While a 12-month FTC might seem risky, especially in a tough hiring market, it’s not uncommon in the investment world. If you perform well, it could lead to strong recommendations or even a permanent role at the boutique. Additionally, having direct investment experience on your CV will make you more attractive to other investment firms when you re-recruit. Recruiters and hiring managers value relevant experience over job stability, especially early in your career.
Risk of the IC Role:
Taking the IC role could make it harder to transition into an investment role later. As you mentioned, recent exits from the IC firm have been to solutions or client-facing roles, which are less aligned with your goal of becoming an investor. Spending 2+ years in IC might pigeonhole you into a non-investment track, and recruiters may indeed find it harder to pitch your profile to investment firms.
CFA and Networking:
Regardless of which role you choose, pursuing the CFA designation will strengthen your profile and signal your commitment to a career in investments. Additionally, networking within the industry will be critical, especially if you take the FTC role and need to re-recruit after 12 months.
Market Realities:
The hiring market is challenging, and securing any role is an achievement. However, if you’re confident in your ability to re-recruit after the FTC, the long-only equities role is the better option for aligning with your long-term goals. If you’re risk-averse and prefer the stability of a full-time role, the IC position is a safer choice but comes with the trade-off of potentially limiting your investment career trajectory.
Recommendation:
If you’re serious about becoming an investor and can handle the uncertainty of re-recruiting after 12 months, the FTC in long-only equities is the better choice. It provides direct experience in your desired field and keeps you on track for your long-term goals. However, if financial stability and job security are more important to you right now, the IC role is a solid fallback, but you’ll need to work harder to pivot into investments later.
Good luck, and remember: the first few years of your career are about building the right foundation, even if it means taking calculated risks!
Sources: Private Equity vs. Venture Capital in 2018, Two Offers - Need Advice, Fork in the road: Career path in Asset Management, Very Tough Decision - Short-term Comp vs. Long-term job, https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forum/private-equity/going-from-mm-investment-bank-to-mega-fund?customgpt=1
Bumping again
bump
Bumping, any insights appreciated :)
Bump
In a similar situation, interested as welk
To recap - you currently have a full time, equity research role at a sell side firm and you are considering leaving it for either an investment consulting role or a 12 month equity research.. trial/stint I guess - at a LO AM specializing in equities. My first question - why are you leaving an FT, SS Equity research role - a few years there will give you experience that you can shop to an LO AM that doesn't have a 12 month trial or whatever setup that is (feels odd - is it a junior program or something?).
Investment consulting doesn't preclude you - but IMO it's less relevant experience for where you want to go than sell side research (again - I may be entirely misunderstanding your current role). It's a tougher sell - you'd want to move your role closer to covering specific managers and/or asset classes or be able to tie decisions you make directly to allocation changes, tilts, etc. Broadly - it's not really the path you describe as wanting.
I don't quite get the 12 month stint so it's hard to give realistic advice to say 'yeah, just go for it and maybe they'll extend you!' - that would be the aggressive, bet on yourself route.
Thanks for the reply addinator! And yes exactly, you’ve got it understood perfectly. The reason I’m leaving the SS ER FT is because the firm is moving abroad in a few months with the expectation for everyone to move with them, and I don’t want to go abroad, so my hand is being forced a little. Can’t give more details without doxxing myself, but this certainly wasn’t the plan to leave this soon- I was committed to the couple of years path you mention before jumping to LO or L/S etc, but this is how it’s played out.
The fixed term contract is at a junior level like you guessed, their model is to not hire permanent juniors, they just prefer fixed term juniors. The likelihood of staying in beyond the contract length is basically 0 from what I’ve been told, so it would be a position to give me runway to look for my next role whilst building my skills. But yes this is super helpful! Is there anything further you would add to your advice in light of the fact that I won’t be in the role for much longer since I don’t want to relocate? Thanks again for your reply
Dolorem expedita ullam voluptas ipsam. Sed reiciendis id aut ducimus provident sed ducimus. Quae incidunt neque amet rerum adipisci ut. Et eligendi qui culpa. Mollitia voluptatum voluptates quisquam qui vitae. Perferendis explicabo provident distinctio et omnis dolore. Cum odio aut aut facilis sed voluptatem iste.
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...