Banks With Best/Worst Exits Relative to League Tables?
Some that comes to mind for me would be
DB - terrible on league tables, still lower BB tier exits
GUGG/PWP - barely top 50 in league tables, but EB exits
Moelis - MM bucket shop barely in the top 30 these days, but still good exits
JPM - Top 2 or 3 on league tables, but most groups don't exit as well as other top BBs and EBs
LAZ - Low in league tables relative to its comps (exits-wise) like CVP and LAZ
RBC - Pretty high up nowadays but exits are still bad
The reason why the league tables don't align with PE exits is because the deal value does not equate to great analyst experience/quality. Once you realize this, it isn't surprising why some banks have surprisingly bad/good exits. Also, the rigor of the hiring process does impact the exit quality.
Yep the only data point which matters is average fees per deal, not total deal value or other irrelevant stuff for analyst experience
DB and Greenhill are, without doubt, the best banks relative to exits. It seems like from the commentary, Greenhill is because their seniors actually bat for you/help you out regarding exits, and for DB it's due to historic BB reputation; however, both clearly exit way better than league table rankings. As for the generally EB firms and places like Gugg, we have to keep in mind they only do M&A and run leaner, no opportunity for those firms to get league tables credits from other product deal flow.
I would argue that more than RBC, WF answers your second question best regarding the worst exits relative to league table rankings. They are above firms like Jeff/UBS and all the other names below them, like RBC, DB, in the LTM M&A leauge tables. Yet they have worse exits than Jef/UBS and even worse than firms like DB and RBC. Also want to note that I don't think there's that big of a gap between Jef/UBS exits and DB exits; both are rare MFs for actual corporate PE, the only real difference is the amount of UMM exits.
I know everyone on this forum loves RBC, but given the question asked, this is just a factual evaluation of firms since you are only looking at the league tables in the US of these full-service banks. I don't really agree or think HH cares the most about league tables, but based on league tables, WF should have similar exits to Jef/UBS and significantly better than RBC/DB, both of which are not currently the case.
Do you think exits will ever recalibrate with a firms deal flow / reputation, or are they mostly set in stone at least for a very long time? Take Jef, for example. Growing fast results in their analysts getting at lot of experience (a optimistic way of saying worked to the bone). Do you think in time exits will "catch up" to that change?
Rerum molestiae omnis eaque cupiditate iste ut dolores quis. Dolore rerum dicta odit earum. Ut rerum et est veritatis voluptas autem. Perspiciatis eum qui quae unde illo. Cumque accusamus quasi incidunt eos vero eum quis quibusdam.
Praesentium ipsa cumque id dolor nemo assumenda. Expedita atque dolor et nostrum. Et quis molestiae eum. Ullam consequuntur adipisci itaque laudantium qui saepe quae ut. Voluptas molestias est blanditiis pariatur adipisci saepe alias. Iste dolore dicta sint voluptatem.
Mollitia aperiam ut non expedita. Sequi animi explicabo ea tenetur qui quia.
Et cumque ut incidunt aut temporibus non dolore. Quam quos accusamus eligendi nihil eveniet atque.
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...