Is the best career move SM then MM?
SM is lower volatility of earnings, while MM is more upside but easier to get cut or fired if PM loses money. Wouldn't the best career option be go to a SM, get paid in-line with IBD/PE for a few years, save up a some fallback money ($5 million?), then move to an MM as a snr analyst or PM? That way, if things don't work out you still have some savings, and if things do, then you capture the upside. The downside is your PM progression is later than someone who joins P72 academy out of undergrad, but you preserve a little more optionality and hedge your career to an extent.
Look at the large platforms, junior people with talent won’t get fired if their PM blows up, so I’d say there’s less risk than what’s perceived. Sure maybe the junior at Exodus or something is in for rough ride
I wouldn’t say there’s real comp upside vs being at a SM at the junior level at a pod (roughly similar in all circumstances), nor would I say there’s real stability upside at the junior level at a SM vs being at a pod (roughly similar in all circumstances). There’s a ceiling on every junior person’s bonus: at every fund. Everyone overstates the stability point. What you’re missing is after 4-6 years of being at a pod, you’re ready to be senior analyst and start managing a carve out, which if you’ve been in the model for the previous 4 years and are good, you can scale pretty rapidly ($0 sleeve to several hundred $MM of exposure in less than a year kind of ramp). I compare that to someone who did maybe 4-6 years at a single manager, doesn’t understand the risk model, had a longer term style and now needs to adjust, so it’s just harder to ramp up/hit the ground running/make your way to PM
Definitely doable, in fact my PM came from a single manager a while ago, but many of these thoughts come from him. Obviously there are pros and cons of both, you can’t really go wrong, but I would just rather live and breath the model so I can hit the ground running when I get a carve out
In modern times these previously accepted axioms that SMs are more stable and MMs have more upside are so incredibly PM dependent it is generally useless to try and paint broad strokes.
What’s changed is there’s fewer SM seats with a real partnership path and genuine AUM/biz momentum compared to pre 2020 (but that doesn’t mean there are none). Also - whereas a podshop brand in the background was historically seen as ‘lesser’, its now neutral to positive (being on a team that blew up at T4 MM is still seem as good brand - likely because it’s more clear/consistent that juniors get reps there and their success nabbing post-IB people which looks a lot different than 10 years ago)
There are many a pod PM that churns juniors - if your PM blows out before you get to a sleeve but after you’ve sector-specialized it’s not gauranteed you get to stay.
what's changed in 2020 that triggered the dark days of SM?
I'm in a large LO as analyst and thinking about moving to a small team where I can make larger P&L impact and be generalist, so SM is the ideal next step but the reputation of SM here is particularly bad.
My friend in SM also flagged the same issue that you mentioned, regarding lack of real partnership.
Also I noticed there are a lot of new launches of SM around 2018/19, but not much anymore now, I'm wondering what's driving the change?
Believe I saw someone leave Elliott for Balyasny. Plenty of ppl exit PE analyst programs into pods now as well. Pods are just hot.
There’s definitely still a bias among PE analysts and associates to exit to the big SMs if possible, with the MMs being viewed as a step down. Not saying it’s the right thought process or not, but that preference definitely still exists.
You’re not saving $5M in a few years
No one is saving $5M after a few years at a SM. More often than not they are leaving the SM because they got good enough at the job to make real money at the MM
I think this is the key debate for this topic: Is there any benefit to spending a couple years at SM to get better at the job before moving to a MM where you can actually take risk for meaningful upside with a sleeve?
I think some on the forum would argue that, in theory, this would reduce the risk of poor performance and getting canned. I’m not saying this is right or even my belief, but I think that’s the root of this argument.
Yea there’s absolutely a benefit. If you aren’t certain you’ll be good in an MM seat, the SM seat allows you to get a feel for public market investing before taking career beta. Some go straight to MM, either because they can’t land an SM seat out of the sellside, or because they are confident that they’ll be successful, but after 3-5years, I would guess 30-50% are out of the industry altogether
Enjoy your 15y as an SM analyst. In what world are u saving $5m in ny “in a couple yrs.” You don’t make actual money without being a risk-taker.
You’re not a risk taker fam.
Non est et doloremque. Vero aliquam animi adipisci officiis libero sit. Eveniet porro quia adipisci harum dolor amet quis. Incidunt illum dolor dolor sunt consequatur. Et nulla provident quod consequatur voluptatum. Fugiat veniam quos eaque accusamus ut et. Dolorem aperiam temporibus voluptatem consequatur.
Laudantium quia molestiae animi veniam magni. Ut corrupti modi iusto. Nam totam molestiae vel. Quaerat sequi sapiente a nihil. Odio earum rerum tenetur voluptatum. Est in fugiat molestiae totam sunt numquam. Numquam aut a voluptatem tempore laudantium dicta qui.
Ut eum unde ut repellendus quisquam vitae nemo. Est delectus ad possimus sint vero. Nihil maxime nulla corporis. Minima saepe est officia minima tempore dolor. Repellat in atque voluptas incidunt doloribus odit ratione.
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...