In most shops, analysts in these funds are treated like analysts in PEs. Career progression way slower vs. non-activist L/S shops; Too much powerpoint work; You're in a deal execution workflow, not really generating ideas etc. until you (<5% chance) make it into the PM; Very slow feedback loop on theses.
I don't understand the fuss here about these funds. You should post in the PE section. Thanks.
| +95 | Best SM seats in 2024? | 70 | 21m | |
| +84 | If and when to move to a pod? | 19 | 2h | |
| +69 | Pod Shop Regret | 24 | 1d | |
| +24 | Intellectual Caliber of People in HF | 15 | 2h | |
| +23 | Understanding pod shop leverage & cash usage | 2 | 2d | |
| +16 | Are you making money these days? | 9 | 4d | |
| +12 | Mid to Low Frequency Quantamental | 1 | 5d | |
| +9 | Suggestions for market structure analysis & better trades | 1 | 5d | |
| +8 | What discount rate do you use if you don't believe in those damodaran beta crap? | 17 | 17m | |
| +8 | Opinions on Yipit and/or Mscience? | 11 | 5d |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
And that’s a good thing
Probably
Does this make you feel better about your pod shop job working for a freshly promoted 33 year old PM
My PM is 35, respect pls
***
wait are you saying that at less than 40, you’re only an analyst at a $5bn activist fund managing 25% of the risk because you’re a non target or that you’re doing all of that despite being non target.
Yeah if he was a target he would be managing 75% instead
***
***
#1 What would you recommend to look out for interview / due diligence process to identify funds like this. Usually asking about opportunities to learn/ growth can be dangerous as you don't want to give off impression that you need to be hand held, but we all want mentorship in this industry and at the same time have to give off impression that we need no help and can contribute a ton of value day 1 (obviously I'm not saying I phrase it like this but you get the idea). Have another round coming up with a somewhat specialized activist fund and want to make sure I diligence them properly.
#2 I come from a very non-traditional background, but have gotten a few interview shots at larger "prestigious" funds thanks to networking. One issue I ran into is that I have gotten great feedback (I know you can't always trust the feedback, but I think I am nailing a lot of this stuff), but at the end of the day, whether it be for marketing purposes or other issues, it seems like the superiors struggle to be open to adding someone who didn't do GS/JPM + APO/BX/etc. prior to the fund. I asked for candid feedback and it has only been: "we need someone with more experience in this sector, but we think your capabilities, cultural fit, and investment philosophy etc. were great." or another time it was "I have no doubt you would add value to our team after a few months, but we need someone plug and play who knows our names intimately on day 1".
I know I won't get a chance at viking ever, but any tips on overcoming the non-traditional path stigma?
bump
On the first point - nice part about activist funds is that they have to be a bit more public than say a L/S fund of the same size since they often run campaigns. There is usually more reporting on investments / positions from the activist side than there is on the L/S side. Lazard puts out a decent deck and there are a few other sources that report on campaigns.
On the second point, looked at your post history, its great that you are getting interviews but realistically I don't think its a prestigious firm issue and and moreso is an experience doesn't really check the boxes of what they typically are looking for. If you are coming from a LO / RIA background, its not like you are getting dinged cause you did IB / PE at smaller firms for example Blair and then at Court Square vs. GS / BX. It feels more that you are getting dinged because they aren't sure that your background can really hit the ground running without that prototypical background. You obviously are interesting enough to them to use investment team time to interview you so would think about how you communicate your ability to do the job as that is likely where they aren't getting conviction in your abilities.
The cope is strong with this one
Don't worry we quants look at you L/S ants exactly the same way you view the activist guys.
And the HFT guys look at us slow-poke stat arb/RV quant sloths in the exact same way we view the ants.. and the latency food chain continues
Dignissimos sed id quo ea fugiat rerum. Suscipit quod dolorem illo ullam. Qui ut vel voluptas. Explicabo minima est expedita voluptatum magni culpa veniam.
Et distinctio dolores sit voluptatem cupiditate qui nostrum. Odio neque inventore aut voluptas accusamus aliquam. Modi et sed error.
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...