HF/PE difference in 3-statement modelling

We’ll keep this very high level, as obviously both are different investing processes and different strat HFs are interested in continuing with a model across a plethora of different outcomes, whereas in the early stages of a potential PE PortCo it’s ‘can we hit minimum returns and make this work’. (Ofc sector also falls under certis paribus).

Question: for those that have done both HF and PE investing, what are the main differences when modelling a three statement? Are there ever any major differences in the way you structure the model? Ofc you’re sensitising for different things. But any light shed on how you think about things differently, even niches when building the model that you didn’t expirience in one or the other would be really interesting to hear! - Cheers

7 Comments
 
Most Helpful

I don’t model B/S or CFS, I do an extremely bottoms up cost and revenue build, I want to know to a good level how much pricing/volume , fx/scope from top line translates into EBITDA

 

how much does the model guide your idea generation process? Trying to understand if it starts with the model or the model is just a way to quantify it

 

First of all:

Most names you simply model because they are part of your pre-agreed coverage.

I wasn't asked to discover new names very often.

AFAIK, at many MMs, PMs can't even randomly add new names to the book.

This has been my experience.

Second of all:

If I add a new name, it starts with the model (after some high level reading). Given people trade around earnings, I was taught that the numbers matter a lot.

Of course, it's an iterative process ... as you learn more about the company and industry, you tweak the model.

But I've also seen people first come up with an answer and then fudge the model until it was consistent with their gut view. This might be the more practical process for e.g. case studies / take home assignments under time constraints.

 

Non eligendi enim voluptatem officia voluptatum natus. Dolore dolor enim veniam reprehenderit necessitatibus beatae. Dolorem eum voluptas itaque id et ut.

Qui cum perspiciatis deserunt temporibus qui est. Quas reiciendis ut ut nesciunt sit amet.

Career Advancement Opportunities

August 2026 Hedge Fund

  • Point72 99.0%
  • D.E. Shaw 98.0%
  • Citadel Investment Group 97.0%
  • AQR Capital Management 96.0%
  • Magnetar Capital 95.0%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

August 2026 Hedge Fund

  • Magnetar Capital 99.0%
  • D.E. Shaw 98.0%
  • Blackstone Group 97.0%
  • Citadel Investment Group 96.0%
  • Two Sigma Investments 94.9%

Professional Growth Opportunities

August 2026 Hedge Fund

  • AQR Capital Management 99.0%
  • Point72 98.0%
  • D.E. Shaw 97.1%
  • Citadel Investment Group 96.1%
  • Magnetar Capital 95.1%

Total Avg Compensation

August 2026 Hedge Fund

  • Portfolio Manager (9) $1,648
  • Vice President (27) $464
  • Director/MD (11) $372
  • NA (9) $320
  • Engineer/Quant (83) $287
  • 3rd+ Year Associate (26) $284
  • Manager (4) $282
  • 2nd Year Associate (32) $253
  • 1st Year Associate (76) $193
  • Analysts (233) $178
  • Intern/Summer Associate (29) $145
  • Junior Trader (5) $102
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (276) $95
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
3
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
4
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
5
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
6
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
7
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
8
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
9
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
10
numi's picture
numi
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”