Wellington vs. Viking Global vs. Boutique AM

I was fortunate to receive offers from these two firms, and would like to get some thoughts on what firms to go. 

A bit of background of myself:

  • IBD + LO AM ( changed a few LO shops, now at one of Cap/Fido/TRowe), 10Y+ experience.
  • I've changed jobs a few times, so ideally next move want to move to somewhere I can stay for at least 5 years +. 
  • I didn't like the centralised research model and close to indexing investing at those large LO AM firms, therefore my ideal next step was always more boutique firms or small team where everyone has larger responsibilities and does proper investing. 

Wellington is probably the only one of the larger LO AM that has more of a boutique structure, but the role I interviewed is a GIA role (same as current centralised model, the only difference is that there is better visibility to move to a "boutique" style equity portfolio management team later on internally, should those opportunities come up), however, I'm not sure if it's the same as other large LOAM in terms of index hugging?

The pros: it's relatively good pay and good career stability; cons: a bit too boring? seems to be a retirement job? i.e. better for someone that is 40+?

Viking I know is more alpha-oriented, but career stability doesn't seem as good as Wellington? Pros: I've never worked at a proper hedge fund so quite curious, esp because I'm quite fed up with non-alpha orientation at current LO place. Also, I'm still in early 30s, having been at large LOAM for a few years, I felt those places are better suited for someone 40/45+ yrs wanted to retire? (no offense, please correct me if I'm wrong as I'm also worried I may fall into the trap of "grass is greener elsewhere")

Separately, I'm quite curious on Wellington and large LOAM in general as those places seem to be most desired place to work for as compared to boutique shops (incl. SM HF?) on WSO? My view on large LO AM maybe biased against because I didn't enjoy current centralised coverage role, or possibly because I'm at a place with not so great culture, but I'd like to know any specific reasons why larger LOAM is favoured than boutique places given the obvious drawbacks discussed above. 

How would you rank between Wellington vs. Viking vs. Boutique AM (the likes of Harris Associate, Artisan Partners, Baron, etc)


All thoughts appreciated. 

 

Why did you say that? I'm asking is because there are too many replies here with simple answer but no reasoning to back it up, so just curious to hear your reason. 

What makes you believe a career in HF won't face the same or even more challenge AM faced over the last 10 years? esp given these days putting cash in T bills yields 5% return vs. HF industry on avg delivered just marginally better result than that over the last decade... Why wouldn't there be fee compression and asset outflows? I agree with you Viking is the one better positioned, but SM HF may not be as glorious as it appears... 

esp if you consider all factors holistically, not just focus on ST comp upside. For example, a big downside I see comparing to boutique / small-team generalist setup is that sector specialist setup restricts the freedom to learn different sectors and hunt for alpha which is essential if you ever want to become a diversified PM, and even for those who are happy to be a sector specialist, there is no career progression unless the sector head leaves/retires.

 

Can you share what comp progression would have looked like at your LO? Say, if you stopped out at analyst and never made it to PM?

I see your point about sector specialists maybe not getting the opportunity to learn generalist PM skills but tbh I can't really think of anyone I know that grew up at a L/S shop as a generalist analyst and became super successful because of it... maybe different in LO

Btw I'm not even sure "boutique LO" will necessarily give you generalist coverage. I know peripherally one person at Artisan (which you put in this bucket) and they seem to be sector-specific

 

Just asking to get different / unbiased perspectives from audience other than my own circle, as occasionally there might be a few people with interesting insights posting on WSO.

It's basically a discussion of career in AM vs SM HF for mid career professionals, which I saw very few discussion around. 

I'm actually quite surprised by the replies from these replies - it implies people should stop asking questions and assume they should know everything after 10y+ exp, I can tell you the reality is most don't know everything, people don't have full sight of alternatives, esp the route they haven't experienced before (most ppl can't even articulate the pros and cons of large AM or HF and blindly assume what's better or not by brand name or prestige, and even many industry participant can't tell difference of working in different boutique unless they've worked there before ) and there is always something to learn from everyone...

 

Hard as a diamond in a snow storm by the end of OPs post

 
Most Helpful

Wellington offers a clear path to annuity-like 7 figure comp with good work life balance, good culture, low stress. You most likely have to pay your dues for a few years with lower comp. The upside as a PM is still very high but will take much longer to realize (10+ years) than a place like Viking (2-5 years). Wellington is primarily Philly/Boston with a smaller NY office, whereas Viking is primarily NY and Greenwich. 

5-10% of Viking analysts become fuck you rich (senior PM/launches a fund, $100m+ net worth), some analysts get promoted to PM and make $1-10m for a few years, while most analysts get axed within 2-3 years. Worse hours, culture, and stress than Wellington, but more decision making power and less bureaucracy.

As you’ve described, the GIA role pitches to many PMs similar to Fidelity’s model. Viking you’ll pitch to the CIO and 1-2 PMs. Pitching to fewer people is usually preferred, but Ning and Andreas are notoriously difficult to work with and known to fire analysts without good reason. You’re still stockpicking at Wellington, but far less concentrated and much longer duration than Viking. 
 

If you want to bet on yourself and if you’re impatient, then Viking is an amazing seat. Otherwise I’d take Wellington without a second thought. EMV is high across both seats but qualitative factors (distribution of outcomes, culture, WLB, etc) are strongly in favor of Wellington imo. 
 

Wellington is favored over the boutiques you listed because the long-term compensation is higher. The only place that I’m confident pays as much is Capital Group. Maybe Dodge & Cox too, don’t know their comp structure but their AUM/head suggests very high pay. 
 

 

Generally agree Welly is better risk-adjusted play but... to be devil's advocate for a second, do you think getting to the 7-fig "annuity" as a LO PM requires non-investing skills like marketing, navigating politics, etc.?

My sense having never worked at a LO was that yes they do fundamental work but there's a bit more diversity in skills required to rise. Versus L/S where you generally live and die by your stonkpicking. May be completely wrong tho.

 

Generally agree Welly is better risk-adjusted play but... to be devil's advocate for a second, do you think getting to the 7-fig "annuity" as a LO PM requires non-investing skills like marketing, navigating politics, etc.?

My sense having never worked at a LO was that yes they do fundamental work but there's a bit more diversity in skills required to rise. Versus L/S where you generally live and die by your stonkpicking. May be completely wrong tho.

There are politics at Viking too. Viking requires a more challenging skill set with shorting, risk management, etc. Based on my conversations, I believe almost all tenured Wellington investment professionals are making 7 figures or more. This is true at Capital as well. 

 

Yeah I've heard similar dynamics regarding 90-95% of viking analysts churning out / getting cut, but can't comment on comp. Haven't heard greatets things about culture there and it's a difficult place to make it. I'd actually compare it more to Citadel / Millenn / Baly instead of the other cubs where the upside is incredibly high (probably not as high as the pods), yet you have same downside / churn risk. Everyone understates that. VIking is a MM with looser risk lims, not sure if I'd characterize that as a good or bad thing haha.

Can you share comp structure for viking sr analysts / PMs vs welly sr analysts / PMs? Is it formulaic for both (welly cut of fees you bring in)? For viking is there some % of pnl math? And for welly, are sr analysts making L/MSD mm and PMs M/HSD? How does their comp work? Seems like a dream seat, trying to switch

 

Thanks, this is very insightful. I get your point Wellington may offer better LT comps, but is the difference really gonna be huge vs. boutiques?

When I say "boutique", I'm really referring to the type of team setup each has clear investment philosophy (as opposed to advising to everyone at larger LO firms under centralised research model, that makes no sense in my view), small no. of investment professional ideally less than 10 person to have close-knit and more in-depth discussion, and obviously to get paid well and have career stability AUM/person needs to exceed 1bn/person + long term capital + strong performance track record (the last is the criteria which very few firm tick in boutique world).  This type of setup normally organised as generalist or multi-disiplinary sector analysts that does more interesting work than large LO AM only covers 20-30 stocks, i.e. no knowledge or career development other than maybe loads of time to do side-hustles. 

It could be within larger institutions such as Artisan or Franklin where within the firm there are multi-strategy each has their own investment philosophy and process, or smaller boutique $20-50bn shop organised similarly but has a specialist focus (such as WCM, Baron for growth, Orbis, First Eagle for value), or it could be simply a 20 person (incl admin staff) shop managing $20bn for some specialist LP or long term capital - but the issues is if too small, I don't know who they are / where to find / they barely hire.

I'd think this type of firm is the ideal place or better place than larger LO AM? because it is on par if not better than large LO AM in terms of economics/quality of client capital, and avoid all the headache you'd seen in larger LOAM such as bureaucracy, ppl being political, analysts only cover 30 stocks, investment team being index hugging, etc. And I got a feeling the pay is similar if not better than larger LOAM (this website gives some reference point for base at more junior level, not sure about LT comp potential  https://h1bdata.info/index.php?em=artisan+partners+limited+partnership&…)

What am I missing in terms of downside of boutiques other than fit with the team and the fact these type of firms are notoriously difficult to find and get in?

 

Thanks, this is very insightful. I get your point Wellington may offer better LT comps, but is the difference really gonna be huge vs. boutiques?

When I say "boutique", I'm really referring to the type of team setup each has clear investment philosophy (as opposed to advising to everyone at larger LO firms under centralised research model, that makes no sense in my view), small no. of investment professional ideally less than 10 person to have close-knit and more in-depth discussion, and obviously to get paid well and have career stability AUM/person needs to exceed 1bn/person + long term capital + strong performance track record (the last is the criteria which very few firm tick in boutique world).  This type of setup normally organised as generalist or multi-disiplinary sector analysts that does more interesting work than large LO AM only covers 20-30 stocks, i.e. no knowledge or career development other than maybe loads of time to do side-hustles. 

It could be within larger institutions such as Artisan or Franklin where within the firm there are multi-strategy each has their own investment philosophy and process, or smaller boutique $20-50bn shop organised similarly but has a specialist focus (such as WCM, Baron for growth, Orbis, First Eagle for value), or it could be simply a 20 person (incl admin staff) shop managing $20bn for some specialist LP or long term capital - but the issues is if too small, I don't know who they are / where to find / they barely hire.

I'd think this type of firm is the ideal place or better place than larger LO AM? because it is on par if not better than large LO AM in terms of economics/quality of client capital, and avoid all the headache you'd seen in larger LOAM such as bureaucracy, ppl being political, analysts only cover 30 stocks, investment team being index hugging, etc. And I got a feeling the pay is similar if not better than larger LOAM (this website gives some reference point for base at more junior level, not sure about LT comp potential  https://h1bdata.info/index.php?em=artisan+partners+limited+partnership&…)

What am I missing in terms of downside of boutiques other than fit with the team and the fact these type of firms are notoriously difficult to find and get in?

Agree that most LOs with $100b+ aum with lean teams are great seats. Some of the LOs are public and you can see comp & benefits. Artisan, as an example, pays $500m and has 600-700 employees. Based on their AUM, Welly likely pays $5-10b in comp & benefits (including partnership distributions) and has 3.5k employees. The math suggests Welly partners make 2-5x of equivalent Artisan partner, right? Or in the scenario of Baron, even if the AUM/head is high, the founder may keep all the economics. The smaller firms are also less stable over a 10+ year time period because the industry is consolidating. You know that isn’t an issue at Welly. 
 

Could you elaborate why you’ve disliked the GIA model? The analyst I know at Capital seems pretty happy, so I’m interested in making the switch myself. Welly does have small teams (1-2 PMs and 1-2 analysts) managing their larger funds, which you may be able to transition into. 

 

One of my former analysts went to Welly. He loves it there and speaks quite highly of it. But yeah Boston SUCKS. It’s also difficult for impatient pod analyst to be told “yeah you’ll be PM in 10 years” and to go from $1.5mm to $600k…but the LT $s are there

 

Go with Wellington. Viking culture and turnover  truly atrocious while expected life time comp at both places likely similar. Avoid the boutique because comp won't come close to the other two options if ure successful 

Congratulations on all these offers tho. You're doing great

 

The MMs have hundreds of teams so there's tons of variance, but broadly speaking, if we're talking about the good handful of pods, they offer better upside (via comp + career path) for probably better culture and training/mentorship/resources. 

 

Reiciendis animi autem aut eius perferendis quod animi. Et omnis animi temporibus debitis modi dicta. Velit magnam quis culpa voluptas.

Dicta inventore aspernatur natus sunt ea soluta. Mollitia omnis consequatur qui tempore nemo ut. Autem consequatur ea facilis est vel. Adipisci recusandae maxime ab doloribus libero molestiae rerum fuga. Optio eum dolor quia alias id qui.

 

Corporis explicabo ratione modi sed minus. Repudiandae sunt molestiae nihil odit quo ipsa ab. Necessitatibus itaque sint dicta veritatis ducimus nihil cum.

Quia dolores sit quisquam et hic. At rem et inventore qui. Est fuga adipisci aut et. Consequuntur voluptates recusandae est cumque quo sequi optio. Repudiandae harum maxime dolor excepturi aliquam sit velit.

Career Advancement Opportunities

April 2024 Hedge Fund

  • Point72 98.9%
  • D.E. Shaw 97.9%
  • Citadel Investment Group 96.8%
  • Magnetar Capital 95.8%
  • AQR Capital Management 94.7%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

April 2024 Hedge Fund

  • Magnetar Capital 98.9%
  • D.E. Shaw 97.8%
  • Blackstone Group 96.8%
  • Two Sigma Investments 95.7%
  • Citadel Investment Group 94.6%

Professional Growth Opportunities

April 2024 Hedge Fund

  • AQR Capital Management 99.0%
  • Point72 97.9%
  • D.E. Shaw 96.9%
  • Magnetar Capital 95.8%
  • Citadel Investment Group 94.8%

Total Avg Compensation

April 2024 Hedge Fund

  • Portfolio Manager (9) $1,648
  • Vice President (23) $474
  • Director/MD (12) $423
  • NA (6) $322
  • 3rd+ Year Associate (24) $287
  • Manager (4) $282
  • Engineer/Quant (71) $274
  • 2nd Year Associate (30) $251
  • 1st Year Associate (73) $190
  • Analysts (225) $179
  • Intern/Summer Associate (22) $131
  • Junior Trader (5) $102
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (250) $85
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
3
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
5
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
6
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
7
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
8
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
9
bolo up's picture
bolo up
98.8
10
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”