Davidson Kempner
Hi Everyone. There is already a recent post on this shop, which was super helpful. However, I was wondering how Davidson Kempner would stand in comparison to an analyst position at a top LO firm (Wellington, Cap Group, T. Rowe). For context, I went through the post-undergraduate associate program at one of these firms. I think I have a good chance of getting an analyst return offer, but the opportunity at DK looks very interesting for the broad exposure it provides (public&private, special sit. etc).
DK is basically siloed platform. Which team r u being placed on? I am only familiar with their Ls side and the quality of PMs there r quite mixed. Analyst seat at one of the LO sounds like a great opp to me
Not sure about the question you’re asking but are you in their process for that group?
DK is a top hedge fund and very respected within the industry (particularly within credit). They run lean and work their investors hard. WLB much worse than LO.
Don't know if I'd say they're that lean. They have 100+ investment professionals from what I know
Everything else I definitely agree with
they do not run lean. common complaint is the mid level is clogged and has very little room for advancement. that said generically considered a good fund and can prob hop to somewhere leaner when the time comes.
Agreed - frankly it’s a pretty bloated place with a lot of successful, smart people who are probably too comfortable with mid single digit returns.
No comments on Davidson Kempner - but I do want to point out that a post-mba analyst position at Wellington/Capital Group is arguably the best seat in finance. The economics of these private LO shops are such that comp can scale into the 8 figures annually as a pm over a career (not to mention good culture + low risk of getting fired). I'm not sure there is any HF analyst spot that is worth turning down one of these seats. Not all LOs have such generous comp for their analysts, but Cap/Wellington are two of the best - if you have a shot at either of these and interest in long-term stock-picking - it would be by far my first choice. T Rowe I am a little less familiar with.
LO comp is pretty back-loaded though. You'll probably be comped less than your HF peers for the first 10-15 years of your career until you make PM. Few will survive at HFs that long, but those that do can get comped in the 7 figure range before 30. Meanwhile, a top seat at a LO likely means a steady climb to high 6 figs by 30, and low 7 figs by 40. There's also a lower probability of being a "star". Everyone likes to believe they're going to be the next Grant Wonders, so a HF seat provides more optionality in that sense. Its a pretty personal choice at the end of the day. LOs obviously have better WLB, steadier climb in pay, higher job stability, less stress, and probably comparable avg career earnings. Its a trade I'd take any day of the week but it may not be as straight forward for others.
Et aut tempore nihil ut. Nostrum expedita voluptas dignissimos iusto qui ut est. Quisquam perferendis est numquam.
Exercitationem sed earum ut quod molestiae reprehenderit perspiciatis. Ullam quos culpa quam placeat.
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...