Hitting 7 figures at 28-29
Considering that most ibanking, hf or pe salaries for 28-29 year olds at bulge brackets range from 250-400k, is the only real way or may i say best way of hitting 7 figures at 28-29, is starting one's own hf or pe firm. Although the size of the firm is much smaller u obviously will get a much higher proportion of profits, making the risk worthwhile
See a lot of BS here about comp, here are the steps.
1. Grind your ass off in highschool to get to a target, grind harder in college, get to a top BB/EB/MF PE group, grind even harder and get looks from top HFs. Zero sex life, work 18 hour days minimum, follow the markets for fun, but try to come off as a chill dude for recruiting/interview purposes
2. Become an analyst at a $7bn+ L/S HF. You know the type, Tiger cubs + top notch non tiger cubs. Tiger Global, Lone Pine, D1, Whale Rock, Eminence, Darsana, Coatue, Viking, Altimeter type shops. This should put you at ~$300-500k base
3. Continue the grind and work the hardest here. If the fund has a monster year, you want to be a hard working analyst who put in the work and contributed to some of the monster year
4. IF you actually perform + fund has sick year + you have been there for 2+ years, you will make $2-3m. Confirmed from many sources, in some cases as high as $5 but that is by no means a proxy for how much you can make working as an analyst at one of these funds. $2-3+m in a really good fund with a phenomenal year is realistic 100%, and you could be 28-29 at this stage. NOW, notice how I said L/S. Credit/distressed guys are stingy as fuck - I know a distressed analyst who put on a trade that made ~200m for the fund (fund was like $7bn AUM), and he only got paid $900k. That's a lot, but it's fair to say he was underpaid and he left for a L/S fund.
5. Stay at this L/S fund for > 5 years, maybe you're like 32-33 now, maybe you joined when you were 26. Keep pushing and contributing to fund outperformance, and as long as the boss is not racist or discriminatory in some way, you will make PM/Partner where you can reasonably expect to make low 7 figures in a year, and higher/8 figures in blockbuster year. Do this for a few years, maybe catch the next tech wave, put your earnings back in the fund, and you could probably be worth $20-30m by the time you're 37-40, if not higher. Then you go off an start your own fund.
Now this is the story for maybe 1-3 people out of 100 in this business. Maybe. Incredibly difficult, requires the right fund at the right time + the right boss, self determination/drive, and you actually have to be good at what you do. It's the dream for many, but it's a lot easier said than done. Finito.
What you're describing is probably more like 1 in a 10,000. The people who achieve what you describe are probably HF managers themselves. That makes sense, since in the grand scheme of things, there aren't that many legit HF managers.
To grind starting as early as high school is rare, unsustainable, and quite frankly depressing. Going down this path, you'll probably die of stress before getting to enjoy all that money.
Lastly, there's easier ways to make tons of money. Go work for a tech start-up, break into sales (B2B and something high margin), or invest in risky stuff with high (HIGH) potential reward. I have a friend who bought Bitcoin back in 2013. He sold half of his holdings a few years ago to pay off medical school loans, but still owns about $759,000 worth. His original investment was only ~$2,000.
Agree that big payouts are some combo of smarts + hard work + good seat + luck. But I take issue with some of the premises here and how "matter of fact" it's laid out, addressed below. Speaking as someone who hit the goal OP has laid out and knowing several people who've done the same.
1) This is depressing, and I think there's a lot of struggle porn here. While top folks at each successive step are often at the top in preceding steps throughout their career, it doesn't have to come w/ the tradeoff of focusing all your time from the very early days on the singular obsession of making money. Being well rounded early on is more important imo, and honing in on what you're really good at is more of an important focus by the latter half of college (in terms of being in the right neighborhood of you want to do rather than all the specifics mapped out).
2) Generally agree that well regarded funds w/ large AUM and lean investment teams increase probability of a big payout. But equally have to take into account how fungible they treat entry level employees and what the career arc looks like there. Some of the funds you reference are not like the others. Also, not sure if you're referring to $300-500k as a "base salary" or a "baseline all-in entry level expectation". It's definitely not the former, and the latter is pretty accurate, even at top funds.
3) Hardest working =/= most valuable
4) Generally agree, though those comp ranges are very much on the high end for 2-3yrs in a HF seat, even in the funds you mention unless you had significant contributions
5) Can definitely see that kind of earnings arc at the top. Though not necessarily with a PM / Partner title attached (will depend on the type of fund you joined). Rarely does it culminate in "going off and starting your own fund".