Received Offer from MM HF out of undergrad ... wondering about career trajectory
Received an offer from a top MM HF today. For context, I am entering my final year in undergrad at a target and am doing an investment banking summer analyst stint at a BB. I am very happy to be here, and I had a couple questions about career trajectory.
Of course MM HF stressful and has high turnover -- I'm wondering about the worst case scenarios if things go poorly:
1) If my pod blows up, how difficult would it be to switch to another MM HF fund? In addition to MM HF, what are other common exits? I know it is uncommon but what about SM HF? How about the pay/lifestyle for these exits?
2) How does recruiting work to another MM HF? Do you need to be in touch with other headhunters? In addition, let's say I have a poor track record in my role and I get fired. How do I bounce back with this poor record? Do people try to hide their record?
3) If I wanted to leave MM HF, would going to b-school help me reset? In addition, I would not have the typical 2 years in IB experience, but would having a summer analyst investment banking experience at a BB (with transaction experience) help me land a PE role (or even go back to IB)?
4) I would also like to prepare for my role and was wondering what I could do to study in advance. I've been teaching myself everything and would want to hire a mentor in MM HF and will pay an $/hrly rate (you can PM me)
Of course I want to do well and am fortunate to be here, but just considering worst case scenarios! Thank you WSO community.
bump
Source: straight from ChatGPT
It looks like your questions are related to the finance industry, specifically hedge funds and related career paths. I'll provide answers to each of your questions:
Switching Hedge Funds and Common Exits:
Recruiting and Bouncing Back:
B-School and Career Reset:
Preparing for Your Role:
Remember that the finance industry is highly competitive and dynamic. Adaptability, continuous learning, networking, and a strong work ethic are essential for long-term success. It's recommended to consult with professionals in the field, such as career advisors or mentors, to tailor your approach based on your unique circumstances and goals.
I'd add that your exit options from a MM HF are more limited than implied.
While the type of investing you do at a MM HF is comparable to SM HF, data on LinkedIn suggests it is very tough to make the move from MM HF to SM HF. For banking, you'd likely be looking for associate roles, which would want you to have transaction experience which you wouldn't coming from a MM HF. You'd be as familiar with transactions as an MBA Associate, but without the MBA.
You’re an idiot and have no idea what you’re talking about. Stop believing everything you read about pods on WSO when you’ve never even worked in one.
We’ve had some pos in book for >2 years now (in size) and the type of investing is basically the exact same
Our jobs are safe guys
Just google keyword+wso, many of the qs u have here are answered multiple times already.
Honestly wouldn't recommend taking MM over a BB return offer. Banking's training is still valuable and many of the MMs (Citadel/Millennium) don't have formal training pipelines. All of my friends working in MMs right after college are investment enthusiasts and pretty much self-learned everything. Plus, you could easily get a seat at a MM after your 2-year analyst stint.
I thought the top MMs had good training programs, albeit less structured than IB training programs
Don't listen to people who never worked in MM L/S. Ignore headline, I've been working at MM for 3 years, started as grad. Big four MM have such strong brand reputation that you won't have any problem moving basically anywhere if you get fired. There is huge demand for analysts with MM experience from competing MMs, you can just simply move say from Citadel to P72 if you get fired. If your PM blows up your MM will find you another PM to work under (after all they would not pay you high salary for a year during training to let you go after your PM blows up). If you decide you don't like MM you can simply go work to SM; given MM outperformance, analysts from MM are held in high regard and I receive headhunter inbounds weekly trying to hire MM analyst for other MM funds or SM funds. IF you don't like risk taking, you can always move to sellside research or sales, they will want to hire you as MM are typically largest clients and you know what MMs want from sellside. I also got surprisingly few private equity/growth equity headhunters reaching out saying x and y PE is looking for analyst with public investing experience. I did several internships in IB before and can tell you this job is much more interesting - not once have I opened powerpoint or wasted time formatting things. It's mostly reading, speaking to sellside, forming views and modelling. The fact that modelling is the most interesting part of your job in M&A and here it is the least interesting part, says it all. Comp at this level is roughly in line with banking, but with greater upside should you run your own sleeve after few years
Most headhunter inbounds will start once you reach 1-2 year mark. Also with 2-3 years of experience for this top MM I am at, got headhunters reaching out with roles for total comp in first year incl guarantee of 500k-1.2m, not sure how accurate but one would definitely not make that amount as associate 1 or analyst 3 in IB
I would actually hesitate to suggest the move from MM to SM L/S is as simple and seamless as this post makes it out to be. Not coming for you but being in a SM seat myself it just isn't a common transition I've seen across my SM peers. For a few reasons...
1) there are FAR fewer SM seats and even fewer GOOD SM seats that exist, whether that be a lack of AUM or a lack of outperformance in the "net-flexible" type model is not a question I can answer but broadly speaking the capital has flowed towards MMs and therefore their scale in sheer headcount vastly exceeds that of SMs. So the SM seats are naturally few and far in between.
2) most SMs prefer to hire out of banking/PE because they want to mold their analysts from the bottoms-up and have a specific process for how to invest, one that may be altered or "corrupted" by the style at an MM. I can almost guarantee you the style of investing at most SMs is going to be dramatically different from that of a pod, for better or for worse.
SMs at large are just a different breed.. peruse LinkedIn and see where the likes of Viking / Lone Pine / Tiger analysts come from, MOST if not at all had some sort of sell-side IB / MMPE background. Very seldom does a Citadel analyst find themselves at a SM. THIS IS NOT TO SAY IT'S IMPOSSIBLE it's just not as likely or common a move.
The MM seat is great and an ultra-strong training ground but you tend to either 1) jump from MM to MM like musical chairs, 2) climb through the ranks and make PM eventually, or 3) retire / leave / go to sell-side research / do IR or corporate.. something different.
Agreed with most in this post. Just would add that the main reason for why we don't see many people moving from MM to SM is because number of SM seats is limited, and it is limited because AUM of SM has declined while AUM of MM has increased due to outperformance.
Would not say it is easier to move from SM to MM than it is vice versa. They are slightly different investing styles (SM often being more fundamental, longer term and not always market neutral) while MM being more short term, earnings, data, sentiment, news and positioning driven. Clearly the MM investing style has outperformed the SM style recently and AuMs are flowing towards the MM style, hence I would chose to perfect the MM investing style. SM analysts might find it more difficult to understand sentiment, positioning, short term stock moves while MM analysts might find it more difficult to understand deep fundamentals.
Given the performance, AuM and future appears to be with MM, I chose MM despite having an offer from a SM too. I do think it is pretty easy to switch between styles at junior level (eg less than 4-5 years of work experience). Based on headhunter conversation my impression has been that you're just as likely to get an interview working at MM as you are from traditional PE background, but I do think you will find passing interviews easier coming from public markets (even if MM) than from IB/PE route, if your end goal is to work at SM (which I am not sure why it would be, perhaps to have more relaxed life?; but if you want real upside (eg millions early on by running money) go to a MM
Finally may I add that MM have much stronger brand - eg Citadel is more recognizable brand than some tiger cubs, that is if you ever want to work outside public equities after.
Impedit totam sunt beatae qui nisi. Doloremque corrupti vel ut illum aspernatur provident.
Repudiandae ut commodi unde rerum officiis soluta aut. Ut aut et asperiores nobis.
Ipsa adipisci qui inventore dolore accusantium magni voluptatem. Quia ipsam rerum ipsam necessitatibus animi alias dolorum voluptas. Neque eos perspiciatis asperiores natus similique expedita. Laudantium soluta repellat doloribus voluptas. Consequatur pariatur libero culpa et voluptatibus. Facilis enim ea et laboriosam dolorem quas ducimus.
Voluptatem enim quidem odit ab dolorem dolores aut. Ut quidem explicabo laborum odit. Vel eos ipsam molestiae commodi autem delectus. Facilis cumque et eaque non dolor at porro.
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...