Would you stay?
I work at a HF that has a very high turnover in personnel. About 2 years ago, I overheard our PM telling an analyst (let's call them A) to exclude another analyst (let's call them B) on a name / sector / and related emails and discussions that B was handling. Not sure what was the reason / trigger, but then B left shortly after.
Then, about a year ago, our PM pulled another analyst (let's call them C) into a room and told them to exclude another analyst (D) from their calls / conversations / email chains on names and just start doing work on their sector (and just ignore analyst D) - the instruction was pretty explicit ("I don't want you to talk to analyst D") - analyst D then left.
Recently, I heard the PM tell this to another analyst E to do the same to analyst F - just start to do work on their sector and don't tell them.
It seems recurring - all of those things happened when the people were still on the team / sitting on the floor (can pretty much hear it being said). Is this normal in HF industry? FWIW, analyst D had okay attribution, analyst F had good attribution (analyst B I don't know as well / didn't know data then). Neither of them are the biggest lost makers at our fund (there are people with way worse performance). Each time, this were done behind the analyst's back with deceit (and promise of bigger role at fund to the person doing so, who then happily did so). Each time so far, it's been a less experienced analyst encouraged to exclude a more experienced analyst who have worked on the same files and replace them / step up.
PM has been nice to me because I think he wants me to do the same thing to another analyst. Fund performance is mediocre, and so is pay (below average on both). Based on the pattern, I think the same thing can easily happen to me as well. Should I trust that things might turn out fine for me, or run / use this time to recruit? In addition, it just seems like a dumb way of doing business to me - if no one stays and no knowledge is retained, why would you be able to outperform market?
Depends on what other options you have and pay. On the pay, how "below average" are we talking and YOE?
I’m 5 YOE junior analyst. See 10+ YOE folks at 500k here
Just for some context - pm been telling me I’m great and I’ll have big role on the team in XYZ sector (currently done by others)… I just feel like I’ve seen this movie before… I’ve heard him say exact same thing to A/C/E, who eventually replaced B/D/F, and are now looking to be replaced by me and my peers orchestrated in the same mechanism within 2 years
not sure i follow. you're pulling +/- $500k with 5 YOE? wouldn't necessarily call that "below average," unless you're comping yourself to multi-billion SMs
I’m not getting 500k, I’m 350. The 10+ YOE are 50k tops
got it. i'd start looking. not a culture that i'd want to stay in.
Regardless of this weird backstabbing analyst dynamic, if the fund is mediocre performance and low pay, you should probably be keeping an eye out for other opportunities regardless unless you feel you're somehow learning something very beneficial (which seems at odds with mediocre fund performance)
This isn’t that atypical of a dynamic at a HF.
#1- your perception of someone’s attribution isn’t as relevant as the founders.
#2- “not being the biggest loser” at the fund is not a particularly inspired accolade
#3- these decisions can be made on backward looking performance, but it’s also based on forward looking performance. Maybe the PM hates the book and thinks it needs to be rebuilt and this person isn’t dynamic enough to adapt in the new world order. Maybe they performed well optically, but relative to market they underperformed. Maybe they outperformed market in their sector, but only bc it was a particularly easy year for that sector and most he massively underperformed his peers across the rest of the street.
#4- maybe your PM just doesn’t like these people
#5- if performance is meh, it seems like another explanation is that he’s keeping his expenses low but firing senior sector heads and giving battle field promotions to their juniors. Helps 2-fold. Don’t need to pay the guy you just fired. And you can underpay the guy you just promoted bc you gave him a huge promotion and he should be playing for upside.
Regardless, while it doesn’t sound like a great culture, it’s not that out there. The HFs with truly good culture are few and far between.
Eum beatae dignissimos laboriosam veritatis earum alias. Similique incidunt similique ducimus eligendi distinctio a porro. Reiciendis veritatis hic labore ad saepe quod deserunt consequatur. Deserunt sit dicta id magni unde fugiat et.
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...