Good not great, "B+" SMs in NYC
Looking for newer or "decent" SMs. I have an UMM PE background and H/S MBA but I'm a B+ player, wouldn't hack it at Viking or Elliott etc., just don't really give enough of a shit and don't really eat/sleep/breathe finance.
I'd like to go a place that isn't full pedal to the metal. I've worked for a few of investment firms over the years and preferred working at one that performed slightly lower than the others, still had decent returns, but was overall more chill and 80/20 when it came to modeling and obsessiveness.
I realize that being 80/20 is where you lose returns but it's also less stressful so that's the trade I'm looking for. Curious if anyone has any thoughts.
.
I think you're describing the vast majority of the industry. The pod shops, most tiger cubs, a few other big brand name hedge funds (Holocene, Glenview, etc.) will be 60+ hours but if you're looking for a place where you can make a career working 8-5pm, putting a few trades on a quarter that make money, that's most HFs operating in that $300mm-2bn range. You're not going to make more than $500k per year doing so, however.
The self-labeling as mediocre, and thus hoping to find funds that only hire mediocre people, is quite interesting.
all SMs are B+ compared to pods
I'm sure the Pershing/Elliot guys are torn up over their Exoduspoint/Point72 rejections
Yeah all 10 of them
Sounds like LO will be a good fit for you - yes fewer seats but you’ll interview better than 90% of the candidate pool and can coast afterwards even at the top shops
Yeah cuz those are easy jobs to get. You have 3-4 top shops. Each of those takes maybe 3-4 ppl a year as analysts. Most of those being MBAs. Get a grip
OP has H/S MBA
Better CV/more recruiting reps than most analyst candidates with UMM PE background
Don't need to be in 3-4 top shops to coast on mid-6 figs (if you're looking to make 7 figs consistently at B+ shops regardless of LO/HF not gonna happen)
Thanks, everyone, this gives me enough ideas to go hunting around. Bananas to all.
I’m a pod analyst now but used to work at one of the below funds
Not sure I’d call Viking A tier. Maybe A-. tons of brain drain in last 2-3 years and really questionable people at the top. Elliott is a great fund but can’t really compare to l/s
What comes to mind when I think b+ tier funds among the subset of good funds (this is a niche question)? Maverick Holocene Viking Palestra DK Glenview Third Point Eminence Baupost
These are not A tier single managers
Idk if I’d include Maverick. Questionable ppl at top and they’ve gotten schwacked way harder than V and other funds
Also remove Glenview from that list
Lol Maverick. Look at their largest holding in their portfolio.
TCI and Darsana not tier A?
Absolutely not. TCI maybe A-. Darsana clown show
Interesting that Holocene is B tier, what would you classify as the A tier today then?
As a current allocator (and former HF PM) who has seen and cut the returns vs peers/various indices ETFs etc, I can tell you for a fact that DK, Third Point, Eminence and Baupost (as well as so many others) all have underwhelming returns. Most are in business because they are long tenured shops, have well-known founders and aren't the worst performers in a multi-hundred line institutional portfolio, or because there is real inertia (read: board pressure on the CIO/team) to keep them there, or because well known peer institutions are still invested. But on a numbers basis these guys just haven't made LPs the money. Sure the senior people at the firms have...
Fault is on LPs for staying but my point remains that these shops are well well past their prime.
agreed maverick probably a B tier. if we're being completely honest, the only real A/A+ tier analysts seats at SMs are (in my opinion) Pershing, Elliott, Lone Pine, no other funds. The other A tier seats (at the analyst level) I'd also consider a career seat at CapG/Welly where there's a path to becoming partner/PM on several funds or an analyst seat at a top pod at Citadel/Millennium where you get close to 10% of your PnL with sleeve-level flexibility on idio
TCI and Darsana not tier A?
Elliott is a tremendously stable platform that has done very well historically, and senior guys made a killing. That said, from a junior perspective (fresh-joiner) today, I think the risk-reward is vastly different and definitely not an A/A+. Effectively operates as a PE firm but with worse exit opps if doesn't work out (no clear skillset transition in eyes of many people, even though the employees are clearly smart) and the upward mobility has been massively stunted the last few years due to substantial overhiring at the junior level. Others may think differently, just think Elliott of the last 20 years is a very different risk/reward than Elliott in the next 20. Still a great job.
Tell us a role that has a better risk reward vs Elliott. Any fund where new joining analyst are making around $1m total comp their first or second year. Doesn't get much better in my view
To be fair, this statement applies to buyside careers in general unfortunately.
Interesting situation, you don't know if a platform will be good for you if you join in its early days and if it does become smt like Elliott then you hit the jackpot, but if you join a platform that is established you might not get the promotion you would've got had you joined 20 yrs ago
Lone Pine? Cmon, they’re not a far cry from D1 (and this def not A tier)
You guys are all clowns
Nobody:
Truly, no one:
25 year old analyst (Harvard ==> Goldman IB ==> top tier hedge fund) that has yet to touch butt: ... so anyway like I was saying, Eminence is no longer a top tier hedge fund in my honest opinion. You'd be lucky to make $1mm a year unless you either hang out for 2 full years or the fund has a killer year. Their Q3 2023 13F revealed they had a position in AMZN, which got smoked on earnings that quarter. Clearly a bunch of idiots.
Looking for pod analyst to take my wife to dinner.
Most SM are C+ my man. Just join one and buy market at the top.
Sometimes SM short bottom as well.
So you’re saying you can’t hack it in the A+ elite tier pod shop world.
This thread is so brutal. There's some post elsewhere on this forum that talks about PE vs. HF and I think the core difference in roles are the differences in how long you can fake it... as a function of duration. PE you can fake it because you need to be bearable to be around X deal-maker, characteristics I'd largely bet are fakeable. HFs you just get marked to market every day in a very volatile and acute way so you can't afford to not be all in.
Going 80% at any hedge fund you are likely to really struggle. I'm not in the biz of all these "tier rankings" as it's dumb and I think you should look for PMs who will teach you how to invest & trade should you want to do this LT. If you find that that's D1 and Lone Pine and not Glenview and Third Point then so be it, frankly it's almost too personal a question to accurately pinpoint what specific fund you need to be targeting. A bunch of them have crappy returns (per 2022) so perhaps that will play a factor in your decision.
Honestly it sounds like you are better off at a LO. Still requires critical thinking work but is a much more calm/cool environment to be an investor, and does not require the over-obsessiveness you are hoping to avoid. You also don't have to necessarily sacrifice returns but perhaps you sacrifice ST (and potentially LT) comp upside, and perhaps a little bit of the autonomy.
Not saying you need to breathe/sleep/eat finance or whatever but you certainly need to love stocks and stock-picking to be at all decent in HFs, otherwise you'll be blown out anywhere.
No. It’s not stupid because those of contributing to the tiers know people at every fund / have met many of their PMs, so that’s primarily what’s driving A. Performance, B. Culture, C. pay, D. Retention etc and thus Z. The rank…
Yeah except everyone ranked Tiger tier 1 until they blew up. Imagine joining them in 2021 just to dramatically underperform / potentially sacrifice a material bonus for a fund you thought was "tier 1" that you joined at the wrong time.
To me it just renders the ranks pointless. It's entirely a PM by PM basis.
I know em too, and I think your tiers are stupid
There are so many rockstar 1-7bn low headcount funds and plenty of these places have turned over their rockstars after the watermark. Even within these ‘well known’ funds, there’s a pretty wide array of quality amongst people there. You’ve got idiots who rode a factor, you’ve got brilliant folks who bailed long ago to set up their own shops, the ‘blue chip’ names are a game of musical chairs. It’s just all so very very dumb.
1) AUM / headcount matters way more than AUM. Not that it necessarily has any relation to which PMs churn analysts vs pay well
2) quality of work - it becomes fairly clear quickly who are the people with quality ideas and work. Imo I’m impressed by / admire people who do awesome work and have actionable, unique ideas when we talk. Don’t have time to talk to the 1.5 yr kid who doesn’t ‘get it’ because his fund has a name brand? It’s just so so silly.
All the funds in this thread have good seats, some also have bad seats cause a bad team structure or group head or something.
Even people I know and these funds…. It’s not like you’re ever gonna have a choice between several of them. A few might be hiring when you’re looking, you might get a couple, and it will be very clear which one clicks.
Est error explicabo magnam quae aut. Id similique vel cum fuga et.
Ipsa totam quam dignissimos expedita magnam. Tempora error nulla maiores non autem eligendi.
Beatae est est quam quia quisquam expedita necessitatibus. Non temporibus quae assumenda libero. Vel delectus itaque hic animi fugiat et quis.
Pariatur omnis consequuntur iste placeat iste doloremque. Reprehenderit totam eum totam et voluptatem sunt nesciunt excepturi.
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...
Error doloribus amet animi praesentium voluptate doloremque. Id ut vel est iure. In assumenda eligendi consequatur. Voluptate necessitatibus fuga officia nulla magnam ipsa repudiandae. Ut nihil unde dolorum voluptas repellat labore. Repellat est placeat dignissimos.
Sint officia laborum quia quis. Quisquam repudiandae maiores quibusdam minima. Consectetur repudiandae alias ut atque ad. Mollitia tempora corrupti eos sit.