Choice of sector for grads @ MM

I work at a MM. Your questions is framed incorrectly. You're not joining an IBD Analyst Program where your worklife balance (WLB) is dictated by your sector team.

TLDR → PM > sector choice as key driver of career success. 

Sector WLB: Stating the obvious, PM investment process + mgmt style will have a much greater impact on your experience than sector game selection. Don't get me wrong... I get that reading up on SNAP and META would be more "fun" then say reading up on the outlook of building materials, but if you sense that your PM has a process which allows for differentiation and repeatability in extracting alpha from sector dispersion (which is really fkn hard to do year in and year out), you won't care what KPI's you're tracking. You'll be focused on making PNL. I'd even argue it's more cool to cover an old economy business with limited coverage / airtime then being the 10th pod trafficking in the same tickers and having half of X talking about their takes on your tickers. Idk.. . obv you can still do well in sexier sectors, I just feel like it's better to develop a unique skillset w differentiated sector expertise, and thus being harder to replace in a world where we get marginalized every second.

Regardless, your longevity in an extremely high churn profession where avg. employment is ~2 yrs and most pods / HF's don't make it past the 5 yr mark will be almost exclusively be dictated by:

a) learning the craft from a great PM/Analyst
b) your PM's ability and willingness to teach portfolio construction
c) luck (time and place)

Success in MM investing is about ability to stay alive and not drawdown past your risk limits, and pounce when opportunity presents itself, repeatedly. We're in the error minimization game (think tennis).

Sector preference: It's hard, but don't stare blindly on what's perceived as "fun" to cover. I promise... when you're winning everything is fun. When you're losing everything sucks. Lets reframe... So all else being equal, is there a way to have a preference? I'd say ~80-90% PM dependent, but ... "good sectors" (which is highly subjective what that actually means) portrays (again imo...) certain characteristics; e.g. high relative intra-sector dispersion (spread between winners and losers), high alpha-to-specialization (knowledge & skill compounds over time), has a degree of cyclicality (cycles drive change which drives mispricings creating lags of market expectations relative to microeconomic realities). 

Increasing chances of desired coverage: Let's assume you do have a preference for whatever reason (say family biz in an industry, specialist college education which can give you a leg up, e.g. medicine covering healthcare etc)... Demonstrating well-informed non-obvious questions and topics about the craft through proactive coffee chats with seasoned PM's doesn't hurt... Demonstrating past interest in the sector through idk... coursework, internships, hobby/knowledge, PA investing may help.

However, the bigger question you should ask yourself is why should the PM pick you? Like any other profession I want to be comfortable that you are smart enough, can do the job, and most importantly, be fun to be around (I'm gonna spend more time with you then my family).

I also want to be comfortable with you realizing that if you have ticker's to cover, I shouldn't need to have to tell you that complacency = death in this profession. It's not a 9-5, it's a lifestyle.

When you're taking a shit you better have the Bloomie app open on your phone skimming for root-cause of price changes and scan for actionable ideas, and not swipe on chicks on Hinge... at least during market hours... Also okay if you're doing field research / "inventory checks" on MTCH :)

Bottom line → Pick a PM with good track over a long period of time with good team culture which emphasizes learning. That's the greatest value add for you assuming you're there to learn the craft + believe life is too short to wake up and work with daft people.