Elliott vs. HBS
Hi all,
Looking for some perspective from people familiar with hedge fund career paths, especially structured credit.
Background:
- 30 year-old with 4+ years buy-side experience at a credit-focused fund ($15-25B AUM)
- Admitted to HBS.
Current decision:
I'm being recruited for an Analyst seat at Elliott in NYC. (Their ladder here is Analyst → Associate PM → PM—there’s no separate “Associate” title.)
My goals:
- Ultimately want to be an executive-level figure in credit/investing—whether at a hedge fund, private credit platform, etc.
- Serious about leadership track and building a franchise, not just staying in a seat forever.
My honest concerns about each path:
Elliott Analyst NOW:
- Elite brand.
- High immediate cash comp.
- Direct path to Associate PM if I make the cut.
– Very real risk of topping out at Analyst title around 33 if I don't get promoted.
– Less optionality outside of hedge funds if I leave without promotion.
– NYC taxes and cost of living erode net comp vs. other non-NYC options.
HBS:
- Extremely portable brand and credential forever.
- VP-level recruiting at KKR/Apollo/HPS/other credit shops.
– 2 years out of the seat, $250k+ cost.
– Possibly lower immediate comp post-MBA (though maybe better risk-adjusted long-term).
– Unclear if the seat I'd land post-MBA would really be better than Elliott Analyst now.
What I’m hoping for:
If you’ve worked in credit (especially structured):
- How would you weigh these paths?
- How real is the promotion bottleneck from Analyst to Associate PM at Elliott?
- Does HBS meaningfully upgrade my odds of VP / Principal and eventually MD seats at KKR/Apollo/Blue Owl vs. just taking Elliott now?
- Anything I'm missing above that I should be thinking about?
Really appreciate any honest feedback.
Thanks in advance!
Bird in the hand is far more valuable. MBA recruiting is also only shrinking, and that trend will only accelerate.
Where does this notion about shrinking MBA recruitment come from?
What stage of the elliott process are you in? Early or final rounds? Just because you’re interviewing doesn’t guarantee you a spot. You will need the process + checks to complete well before your HBS start date for you to even begin considering it. Makes no sense to drop a seat at HBS otherwise. I think this should be the first question.
My current boss (and a good amount of people I’ve met in this industry) went to HBS and speak highly of their time there. Generally agree the MBA isn’t required to progress much in this industry but this isn’t some random school or even a relatively less prestigious M7 school. HBS brand should help pay dividends down the line.
Try and be a bit more general in your posts. I feel like posts here nowadays give away too much specific info. If I recall you made a post about your firm as well on this forum so it could be very easy to identify you if I worked at elliott or at HBS (assuming you had social media).
Based on the most helpful WSO content, here's how you might weigh your options:
Elliott Analyst Seat
Pros:
Cons:
HBS
Pros:
Cons:
Key Considerations
Promotion Bottleneck at Elliott: Based on WSO threads, the promotion bottleneck from Analyst to Associate PM is a real concern. Hedge funds like Elliott are highly selective, and not everyone makes the cut. If you’re confident in your ability to excel and secure a promotion, this could be a great path. However, if you’re unsure, the risk of stagnation is worth considering.
HBS for Leadership Goals: If your ultimate goal is to be an executive-level figure in credit/investing, HBS could provide a broader platform to achieve that. The MBA credential, combined with the network and VP-level recruiting opportunities, might better position you for leadership roles at top credit shops or private credit platforms.
Long-Term vs. Short-Term: Elliott offers a strong short-term opportunity with high comp and a clear path to PM (if you perform). HBS, on the other hand, is a long-term investment that could provide more optionality and a stronger foundation for leadership roles.
Recommendation
Ultimately, the decision depends on your risk tolerance, confidence in your ability to secure promotions at Elliott, and how much you value the HBS credential for your long-term goals.
Sources: Q&A - research analyst at credit hedge fund, Q&A: Currently at a Credit Hedge Fund, CIB Credit Risk J.P. Morgan, Buy-side credit research to hedge fund?, Skip banking for this HF? Need advice
why can't you go to apollo after elliott?
Congrats! I recently graduated HBS and am working in PC. A couple thoughts.
You know better than me how likely an offer is from Elliott / how well the process is going. If you get the offer, you could ask HBS for a one- or two-year deferral. You just pitch it to them that having this experience would add so much to the classroom discussion which is absolutely true. At least this gives you the optionality to see how things are progressing at Elliott. If it’s progressing well, keep cranking. If not, jump over to HBS and you’ll crush recruiting there with the Elliott experience on your resume.
The above option gives you the best of both worlds and optionality (assuming you get the offer and HBS allows a deferral). If you’re really torn and thinking either/or, I would tell you that placing at Elliott out of HBS would be at the very top of the outcomes, on par with a few people going to Viking, CD&R, BX, etc. There are 1k people a year who go to HBS; how many go to Elliott each year? 1? Don’t get me wrong, HBS is an awesome place and if you’re already getting looks from Elliott, you would do super well in recruiting at HBS.
TLDR: First step is get the offer from Elliott, without which this is a very straightforward situation. If you get the offer, ask for a deferral to maintain optionality. If deferral is denied or you just want to pick one or the other, I’d say Elliott
How would you compare Elliott to the average outcome for an HBS grad going into investing again from a top IB/buyside background pre-HBS?
Rather than pivot to tech, search fund, etc
That is probably the more important cohort to compare to.
Assume that Elliott is still great, but that cohort is probably 100/900 grads, and a chunk of them are going to top PR/HF or top LO
According the Harvard's compensation report, the median HBS grad who goes into investment management makes a salary of $178k with a bonus of $90k. We'd need to compare this to his Elliott offer (if it exists and he's not just on final rounds) to see the short term difference. It's impossible to say what the long term benefits of taking the Elliott offer now vs going to HBS and re recruiting is. Long term MBA outcomes are highly variable.
This is annecdotal but I’d say the folks who had MF PE or prestigious HF experience pre-MBA land those roles post-MBA. Generally speaking BX is not taking someone who didn’t have pre-MBA MF experience. There are some exceptions but I’d say even people who had MM PE or some IB experience pre-MBA are placing into MM/UMM PE or LO mutual funds
Elliott does ABS now? Wow they're really expanding.
If you’re concerned about your personal brand, I can’t fathom how someone would think HBS is more valuable than working at Elliott. I mean, where is out of the question after working at one of the top HFs of all time?
Agree, altho its a nieche credit seat at Elliott vs “a lot” of optionality post HBS. If OP wants credit related career long term then Elliott is possibly one of the best seats out there. In case he/she is not sure about career path, then the idea that someone layed out earlier of deferral admissions post Elliott would be extremely efficient
OP says “Ultimately want to be an executive-level figure in credit/investing” so I think that optionality is a bit frivolous for him. Agreed, Elliott + wait and see for HBS is best strategy. Anyway OP, if you’re reading this, I’m jealous under any circumstance lol
#1- you’re way too old to be so focused on the brand, regardless of Elliott or HBS. Focus on the seat that aligns with your view of the investing world, where you think you’ll mesh with the people, where their #s are good, and where you see room for a longer term career track. Literally. Who are the senior people above you? Who needs to die or get fired for a better job to open up? How’s performance? Are assets growing, shrinking, staying the same?
#2- the way to rise to run a firm (implied by your executive goal) is to be a successful investor. There is no “management track” at Elliott, Viking, KKR, Blackstone etc. You’re an investor first. If you’re a money maker and killer, you move up. If you’re dynamic enough to be top 2% every time the game is reinvented for you, you’ll be one of the top guys running the place at some point.
There are no generational brands in the HF business. I’m not current on distressed investing, but just bc Elliott was this destination 15 years ago doesn’t mean they’re not a laughing stock today. Where is Greenlight today? Paulson? Perry St? I’m not saying Elliott’s star has fallen, I’m not in the loop. But don’t take the lazy route and say it’s Goldman, KKR, whatever … that doesn’t translate to that world.
This is a no brainer. People go to HBS to get a shot to interview at a place like Elliott.
If you go to HBS, land another credit seat, then flame out at 36 after 2 years... no one is going to give a shit about your MBA. Are you going to recruit for a Jr to mid level role in corporate or something?
My 2c, so take it for whatever it's worth:
How would you weigh these paths?
I'd compare the downsides:
HBS downside: you'd feel out of place (you're older than typical (26-28), and the investment management space is tiny (think like 100 people interested in this vs. "VCPE", and of that credit is tinier still (think like 20 people), and of that structured credit is the tiniest (think like 3-5)) - recruiting from HBS to Elliott is typically from pre-PE, so you'd have a lower chance of ending up at Elliott post, further some of the classes are hit and miss.
Elliott downside (assuming you get it): you blow up (say you face a mini '08) / burn out / get caught in politics and get axed in under 2 years.
How real is the promotion bottleneck from Analyst to Associate PM at Elliott?
I would point to facts - so Elliott has what, $72-74bn AUM now, traditionally it was much smaller until it had some big wins (which catapulted some staff). It also does not lose money. So your bet is really, do you think there is like $74bn x 8% = ~$6bn of risk-free alpha that can be generated from the market consistently (as opposed to when it was like $40bn in 2020, or like $20bn in 2015). Why this is important is because this is basically a small business that has now grown into a Mid/Large going concern, with an active founder that is now 80. There are growing pains documented, at least in the UK. But your forward is what 5-10ish years from Analyst to PM/Senior? I think there's greater uncertainty in this path given the amount of growth (and therefore the requirements to perform), which can help you track faster, but also raises catastrophe risk (as while one can manage separate strategies and 'things', you're really all correlated, as Elliott is a black box Absolute Return fund, not a Multi-strat).
Does HBS meaningfully upgrade my odds of VP / Principal and eventually MD seats at KKR/Apollo/Blue Owl vs. just taking Elliott now?
On it's face HBS will not get you a Principal role (I have not seen any outcomes like that from on campus recruiting, highest is VP for the big guys) - you'd have to be a 'special case' (as there are always quiet exceptions). Cannot speak to Elliott experience flipping into a Principal, but again will depend on performance. One view I do have is that an extra layer of network never hurts in larger organizations (i.e. having HBS as a background in common with senior leadership is net positive vs. having not having it - but whether that's worth the cost of 2 years is your call - picture the table that has your profile in front of them when they are considering a promotion; the people that know you, know you, they're reading through it maybe there's the partner that doesn't, they see HBS or Elliott - which do you feel makes you more qualified to lead a team/part of the organization, to sell to LPs, foster relationships with strategics etc?).
Summarising this all to answer directly - I don't think it would meaningfully upgrade odds; but I don't think it's a linear comparison; I think it MAY make your odds more convex, but you are paying for it.
Poster further up mentioned the best strategy; get then take Elliott, defer HBS for two years, experience the internal dynamic, decide with more information. But this also comes with a cost, you'd be 34 and recruiting for VP positions (and in the recruitment game, it's always a bit toss the dice, even if you're great on paper).
Final exercise that has always helped me with big decisions - imagine you are 70, you've had your career (and family if you've decided to), and you're looking back on your life, would you feel more pride in having the HBS path (with its uncertainties, i.e. say you get nothing), or the Elliott path (with its uncertainties, i.e. say you get fired in year 2).
Just do what feels right and sounds fun
Like others who have commented, I don’t really see this as a debate. It’s very straightforward
Your overall analysis is good and pretty much covers everything. My two small adjustments would be:
Sorry to be blunt but it’s not 2005 or even 2015 anymore. MBAs are kind of dead and really for second-rate talent (for the same age group, look at the top performers in HF/PE and compare them to the latest HSW classes). The top 26-30 year olds are no longer going to business school. They are starting their companies or killing it at an investing seat.
Of course, top HBS kids still get some good seats but Elliott would still be one of the top exit opps. If you’re a serious investor, go invest.
I’m probably not qualified for this but.
People go to HBS to break into Elliott. If you aren’t a rainmaker, HBS/GSB doesn’t matter.
Also Elliott definitely has plenty of exit opps, there’s a dime a dozen HBS/GSB in finance, but a handful of Elliott. If you’re doing credit you probably aren’t limited to just hedge funds, but even difficult to break into HFs will consider you top tier talent.
I have a buddy who went to HYP -> GS/EVR/MS -> MF PE -> HBS/GSB and had difficulty recruiting for a job.
HBS/GSB is more of a gamble on your career more than anything. If anything, your undergrad matters more. And the opportunity cost too is big (tuition + lack of compensation).
This is what I heard from an alum at Elliott/Tiger Cubs. At the end of the day, do what you feel better about.
Also fwiw isn’t MBA recruiting difficult rn? 25% of HBS grads didn’t have a job lined up and investing seats are even more competitive than ever.
Echoing what other ppl said, pretty sure Elliot seat is already right-tail for HBS outcomes (check out their employment report), factor in expenses and Opp cost, it seems like Elliot is a no-brainer.
Not to hijack .. what is Elliott analyst comp?
Honestly if you need to ask this question you’re probably not going to land the Elliot seat..
reads like an ai post
also Elliott is the choice. you can do HBS whenever. this is your one shot at Elliott
Elliot is one of those places you just don’t really turn down… especially not for an mba
Actually facing the same problem! Thanks OP and all, very insightful
Quia dignissimos iusto nihil aspernatur. Qui ut quia numquam. Sed ut fugiat animi sunt tempora fuga.
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...
At illo ex esse laborum inventore rerum aut vero. Officia et pariatur excepturi nemo consequatur commodi. Aut ducimus et iusto nemo sint sit. Vel alias consequatur nostrum explicabo non ab molestiae sequi.