SM vs MM
I am interested in recruiting for L/S equity post two years as an Analyst at a MF and eventually start my own fund. Given PE, my investing style is more mid/long-term. Seems like the pendulum has swung in favor of MM the past few years. What's the best way to think about SM vs MM in terms of performance, becoming a PM, and starting your own fund? I know there's a lot of nuances (e.g., joining MM is pod-dependent) but I'm hoping someone could shed more light for an outsider to the HF world.
Gonna be real there's a ridiculous sea of content out there to look at now. Googling your question will yield decent results, buysidehustle has some stuff on this, Brett Caughran's Fundamental Edge blog/twitter page has a lot on this too.
You have a TON of resources/threads on wso too.
Fwiw, as an ex MFPE analyst turned MMHF analyst; virtually nothing you have learnt in the past 3-4 years will colour your day to day if your xp is anything like mine...
This question is meaningless without knowing what SM offers you actually have/are considering - whether they are better than a generic MM seat will be a function of fund size/pedigree/performance, stability and comp and only you can properly assess this with offers in hand. To generalise, you’re looking for shops that are willing and able to retain people from high opportunity cost backgrounds (top tier IB/PE), otherwise probably better of going to a pod.
Nam asperiores ut est non similique. In ullam reiciendis et magnam itaque eos unde. Animi in eos et modi. Distinctio ut omnis minima nihil. Sit dolore et est saepe dolore est alias.
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...