How To Be A GREAT Analyst
Incoming at a SM HF (very built-out, well-known fund mentioned on this forum) from undergrad (HYPSM), did well in a bunch of pitch comps, but truly want to know what separates a good from a great analyst. I feel like I miss out on some underlying ideas, or frankly, have the "picture upside down". I try to develop a contrarian investment mindset, looking for the perfect opportunities of great businesses that might be misunderstood, and like everyone else, looking for strong compounders.
I recently listened to Dan Sundheim, and the way he breaks down companies into 3 major drivers so clearly across all sorts of industries is ridiculous. How can I build this intuition or is it just through reps/reading 10ks, books/creating PnL builds?
To become a great analyst, especially at a well-known SM HF, you need to focus on a combination of technical skills, critical thinking, and relationship-building. Based on the most helpful WSO content, here are some actionable steps to elevate your game:
1. Master the Fundamentals
2. Develop a Contrarian Mindset
3. Refine Your Investment Process
4. Build Intuition Through Reps
5. Hone Your People Skills
6. Take Ownership and Think Like an Investor
7. Leverage Resources and Mentors
By combining these technical, analytical, and interpersonal skills, you’ll position yourself to not just be a good analyst, but a great one. Keep refining your process, stay curious, and never stop learning.
Sources: Q&A: 2nd Year MM IB Analyst, Underrated Skill in Investing, Finishing 1st Year as HF Analyst - Ask Anything, Vent Some Wisdom to Incoming Analysts/Interns
Druckenmiller said this recently and it's 100% true: ditch the impulse of being contrarian. Focus on being right, and be pragmatic about it. 80% of the time, the crowd is actually right.
It feels amazing when you are right and everyone else is wrong, but "forcing" those situations leads to bad decisions and a world of pain.
You get paid to make money, not to look smarter than everyone else.
For sure, makes sense. I try not to be a complete contrarian investor since there's probably a reason those companies are trading so cheaply. Still, I am trying to rationalize and think more critically about drawdowns, since I like looking at companies that dropped 50% after earnings (Centene Corp), or situations like SaaS (NOW, ADBE) where the underlying asset is still valuable in the next 2-3 years but shares were driven down by narratives or some sort of idiosyncratic factor
Will try to listen to druckenmiller whenever i get the chance too
Well it's simply a DCF for those companies you mentioned. The terminal value (biggest driver of the DCF) of those companies got decimated because of recent AI implications, so yes a big part of it is the narrative. Sure ADBE can make a ton of cash flow in the next few years, but today the market isn't certain ADBE will be around in 20 years...
Love this.
I can’t stand when kids coming into in this industry feel the need to point out what their “accomplishments” are to validate themselves I guess?
Everyone in this industry went to HYPSM, did well at pitch comps, did MF PE, and whatever else. That’s how we all got here, You aren’t special anymore, so get rid of that mindset and stop telling me about stuff that doesn’t matter.
Why does it bother you so much? It's a 21 year old that is brand new to the industry (and the real world), and trying to understand how they can perform better. They're probably just trying to make it clear that they're open to self-improvement and willing to put in work, and those "credentials" are all they have to point to (because, again, they're 21). Rather than ranting and raving at the kids on your lawn, you'd probably have a bigger impact if you actually combined some real advice on the actual question with some genuine feedback on why the instinct for self-credentializing may backfire in the field.
To OP, unfortunately I'm not in the HF world so don't have any useful content to add on your actual question, but I can't stand when people attack what appear to be perfectly well-intentioned young people trying to learn more for no real reason.
Yeah thanks, man I appreciate it. I only said those to show I'm willing to learn and put in the work, as you said. I really enjoy investing/equities, can't really take my mind off of it, and whenever I'm free, I love to just dive in and read/listen to stuff. Obviously, everyone in the industry is super smart + strong pedigree, but that's why I feel the need to try and separate myself since credentials really only get you into the door/considered for a seat in the first place.
Chiming in as I would be joining an industrials pod, but frankly don't know what to expect... Team seems to be very reliant on data/numbers, and I believe I would be a data/model monkey (I appreciate the opportunity loads so no gripes at all). So just want to know how to be an excellent one to offload work from the team.
isn't everyone reliant on data/numbers? genuine question
Don't think I will have to initiate coverage or pitch any ideas for a while. Just updating data/models fast and accurately from the convos I had with the team - slightly different from my past experience as I haven't work with institutional L/S models etc. and not sure how to be a fast and effective worker aside from just being hard working.
So would appreciate any insights from anyone!
Where did you SA?
Hopefully nowhere
MF/Top Restructuring Group
??
was wondering which podcast you were referring to for dan sundheim. listened to both the ILTB and cheeky pint podcast, are there more out there?
i think i was specifically referencing ILTB, but I have listened to both, and he still explains things very well
Listened to the ILTB podcast with Dan, didn’t hear this part about the 3 things. Can you paste it here
Most businesses have one thing - one competitive dynamic that everything else flows from. Before I touched a model I'd ask: if I owned this entire business and could only track one metric for the next three years, what would it be? And it can't be revenue or EBITDA...it needs to be the leading indicator that tells you whether the thesis is intact or broken.
On primary research, the reason it matters isn't the information. It's that a 30-minute call with a customer or competitor forces you to translate your thesis into plain English and defend it out loud to someone who has no idea what a DCF is ("explain this to me like a 12 year old" is my internal test or something I ask every analyst). If you can't do that clearly, your model is just a precise version of a fuzzy idea. I've changed my view on businesses completely in the first call, not because I got new data, but because I realized I didn't really understand the business yet. The model should come after that, not before.
The Sundheim thing comes with reps. And be honest with yourself about why you were wrong. Most young analysts are so concerned about getting a name in the portfolio that they ignore that part.
agreed
Is fundamental edge worth buying and going through before doing a summer in publics? How does it compare to peak frameworks' course if any of you are familiar? Thanks.
Non asperiores ipsa modi delectus. Perferendis blanditiis modi ut numquam. Error quis quia eius deserunt itaque harum. Est quam consequatur error ducimus sint aliquam voluptates voluptate.
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...
Animi quia possimus quia ea provident adipisci est. Voluptatem delectus aspernatur qui. Explicabo et molestiae voluptatem possimus qui sed velit.