New York vs London as fresh grad
I am curious about the differences New York and London for role at a multi-manager platform.
Context: Currently living in London after growing up elsewhere. Have stayed in NY for months at a time over the past few years and have interned there.
- Compensation: NYC seems higher after taxes, but cost of living offsets that. London’s lower comp comes with the NHS and simpler healthcare.
- Social Life: London feels stagnant for me—more reserved and less dynamic; hard to reconcile this with starting a job and not having time to socialize. NYC seems more vibrant and open from my experience, but I don’t want to over-romanticize it. Enjoyed it a lot during my internship but never had the true experience of living there for a meaningful time for the novelty to wear off.
- Fulfillment: London feels unfulfilling lately (of course this will change a lot as I start working), and NYC could be a fresh start/something to look forward to.
Visas aren’t an issue. early-20s, and looking to maximize career and social life. Any advice from people who’ve experienced both cities?
Looking more at side by side comparison of the cities, not really on the feasibility of moving.
Thanks!
'comes with NHS and simpler healthcare'
- Op clearly doesn't know that UK public services are at Zimbabwe-levels rn, NHS is at its worst performing point in history by every metric possible
Even in Zimbabwe, you're 100.00% sure that the physician is in fact a qualified medical doctor that, if born in UK, would be in oxbridge for sure; in NHS, a "physician associate" may well be some random girl with a bachelor's in chemistry (or perhaps something non-STEM like sociology – I kid you not) & a few months of training to be a "physician associate", who is more interested with obscuring the fact that she's not an actual doctor, & feeling overconfident in her abilities. I fear for the prospect of falling sick on UK soil
Nearly everyone has private health insurance, I haven’t used the NHS since I was a teen
This is a lie lmao. NHS has been declining for years because it’s been massively underfunded but nowhere the level you’re implying.
NHS has never been underfunded, that's the problem with UK politics (party-agnostic), broad consensus is people think you solve problems by throwing money at them. Even in the austerity years under Cameron/Osborne, NHS budget was ring-fenced and adjusted for annual increases. NHS is only ever going to become materially better if you reform and get rid of the bureaucracy and middle-management and invite the private sector in (sustainably and long-term projects rather than some private finance initiatives/contracts that New Labour got ripped off on) with an end view to some insurance and means-tested system. But it'll never happen, the NHS is a religion in the UK and too important for political campaigning with Labour/Lib Dems trying to get on-side with trade unions and inflation-busting pay rises. Improvement in the NHS will only ever happen with true cross-party apolitical means of actual problem solving and being united rather than divisive Westminster politics
If you're pre-kids/family, imo... go to NYC!
NYC > LDN for learning: 10 randomly selected investors/PMs in NYC will (on average) be better than 10 Europeans (I say this as a European myself who spends a lot of time across both NYC & LDN). State side just has a more intense stock-obsessed culture that just breeds better investors during the formative years. Don't get me wrong, there are rockstars in LDN as well, but we're talking law of big #'s and probability wise here, not the outliers. NYC training is a quality stamp. Easier to go NYC → LDN then vice versa.
Better opportunity set: Investment opp set better.... US has more companies, more liquidity, better cap markets and thus better sector dispersions. Also better seats... a long tail of $1-5bn HFs no one has ever heard of that you could pivot to and make $$ should things not work out at a platform. Less of that in Europe. European cap markets fragmentation is becoming a structural issue & top of the political agenda. Needs to get mitigated.
The case for LDN > NYC?
A) you got family on that side of the pond (those 7-hour flights back home add up, some things are worth more than money) & LDN is good enough to allow you to have the cake (family, childhood friends) and eat it too (career opps + £).
B) you have some geographical angle / language / differentiation that means you could get better roles relative to what you could in NYC.
C) Misc stuff - life quality, "Europe at your doorstep" for travel.
D) CEOs of companies you cover are unlikely to get gunned down here
End of the day it'll come down to what you're solving for and how you weight each aspect. All else equal, NYC!
I think this titan-of-industry agrees:
/my2c
Rookie question here - Are Multimanagers in London office not allowed to trade US equities? The opportunity set/stock universe is limited to just Europe?
Or is it because they need analysts on ground and close to the locations of the stocks they cover?
Yes, they are certainly allowed to trade US equities. Most still focus on Europe, but some trade pretty much solely US. The opportunity set in European names is probably limited by liquidity/trading volume to some extent. Time difference is a bit of a hurdle but not massive at all. There is no reason why they wouldn't trade US names
Generally yes... But depends on platform risk framework and sector realities than office location.
Some platforms generally run strict regional risk models, Citadel notably. So your coverage design needs to be adapted to fit that framework (e.g. you see alot of Consumer/Healthcare or TMT/Industrial type books there).
Others might have regional biases but scope to operate under a global risk model which in theory could allow you to be more sector/subsector focused to hit a certain # of tickers with good enough liquidity to scale GMV. Assumes you'll be happy to travel for corporate access and network.
Whilst I know of US L/S people that do cover European names within their domain, it's usally painful and I find that they're more selective when to play.
It's practically easier to sit in London and cover US names given the timezone differences are in your favour + normally better risk profile in the US tickers - so more actual "value add" for the Europeans to do US (then the other way around) on more levels then just another ticker to play.
NY no question. Deeper capital markets. Europe is in structural decline with liquidity falling, companies leaving and no new companies IPOing. There are no good SMs in London outside of TCI. The rest are either pods or funds with a London office. Most are US headquartered except maybe Marshall Wace so you’re probably better in the US either way (ie you’re probably better at Elliott NY than London)
Depends on the strategy tbh... anything macro-related London is better than NYC. I'm sure on the equity side it's the other way round.
Lifestyle wise up to you... I like NYC more as it's more vibrant and has better weather, but London you get to travel to Europe whenever you want.
Cost of living I don't think they are much different. More bang for your bucks in NYC imo.
why is london better for macro?
Big hub for macro operations. Time-zones also help.
Hours tend to be better to trade macro (you get full European session + some Asia and NYC morning), so historically it's the biggest centre for FX and non-US rates.
You can still trade macro elsewhere but most seats would be here.
I'd say do NY right out of school and do not look back. I think the calculus is more complex as you advance in years.
I did NY for 10+ years and decided to pivot to London in my mid to late 30s because I find I value some of the lifestyle in London more than I do in NY at this point. As someone mentioned above, the strategy matters a ton. I work in macro and most would argue London is a better fit for that style. FWIW - I actually remain undecided as I miss being able to trade Asian markets during NY evenings but no one seems to share that sentiment.
Agree with what has been said above. Wanted to opine on the social life point you raised: LDN can be quite "clique-y" in some ways compared with NYC. In LDN, people tend to hang out with school & university friends so making friends in LDN is harder (relative to NYC) If you don't know people. I find people in NYC to be more outgoing/friendly, even with strangers. Also, if you aren't obsessed about spending your life in a pub/drinking then go to NYC.
NYC is my preference by a large margin (and not just for the social life).
What about London HF vs Boston T1 LO?
As junior analyst
Et rerum voluptas id enim voluptatem aut. Quae eos illum ut.
In exercitationem qui voluptatum possimus qui. Provident qui eos magni voluptas facere at. Voluptate et dignissimos exercitationem qui non corrupti. Itaque a voluptatem ut distinctio quia.
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...