Citi vs CS vs Barclays for IB
What are your opinions on these banks? I'm trying to get a general consensus on what would be best in terms of PE placements, especially MF PE.
Trending Content - Investment Banking Forum
| +138 | Restructuring: Anti-climactic Experience | 36 | 7h |
| +110 | IB Net Worth / Savings Check | 51 | 7h |
| +100 | Woman who emptied Knicks trashcan on street then stole it was DEI exec, worked at JPMorgan Chase | 25 | 5h |
| +82 | Stop sleeping on UBS - it’s pretty good | 29 | 41m |
| +70 | Hot take: I’d rather be at Desjardins than UBS for investment banking in 2026 | 11 | 25m |
| +56 | 2026 VAULT PRESTIGE RANKINGS | 30 | 1h |
| +39 | AI + Financial Modelling | 12 | 1d |
| +32 | Hardest interview experiences? | 20 | 1h |
| +28 | Summer before college | 17 | 19h |
| +26 | Current State of UBS in North America | 8 | 2d |
Career Resources
doesn't matter that much tbh - at the end of the day, it depends on your own intellectual abilities. The reason why you see more GS analysts exiting into UMF is because the pool of analysts are ‘generally’ top-notch candidates to begin with and they tend to work on more mega/cross-border deals which looks good on resume. Of course, there are solid candidates across all other banks as well (as you know IB recruiting depends on a lot on luck as well). If you are a top-tier analyst in UBS/DB, you will have no prob exiting into UMF too. CS, Citi, Barclays are all pretty well-regarded. I would lean slightly towards Barclays because (1) M&A is done within the coverage group so you get a more well-rounded experience (2) one of the best culture/working hours in general (i can't underscore enough how important this is). You should also consider deal flow activities within each group/bank
what about BAML, compared to these three?
Are BAML and Citi materially better than CS and Barclays, or is it more American vs Euro?
Out of these firms I would also lean toward Barclays coverage if the goal is PE. I work in PE, and out of all of the bulge brackets, kids from Barclays seem to have the best attitudes and ability to hit the ground running. As for actually recruiting for PE, all of these banks give you a shot.
What's UMF?
bruh do you even fuhnance
all 3 are struggling more than other BBs but select groups at CS like tech are doing well. it’s group dependent a lot of times
if talking about NYC, Barclays is the easy choice here with Citi coming very close behind. Credit Suisse would be great but only a couple of groups are really strong.
CS M&A, Industrials, Lev Fin, TMT and Sponsors are all really strong
A few years ago I would have said CS > Citi = Barclays, now and for the foreseeable future its Barclays > Citi > CS for PE. Even so, they are all still very comparable for buyside exits. Barclays has the advantage of good culture, friendly recruiting for PE, and in-house modeling. CS has the advantage of really strong product groups. Citi has the advantage of being american and well-capitalized. Not an "obvious" choice, but my gut says Barclays just from knowing how analysts across the street have placed and talked about their recruiting experiences.
How long do you mean by foreseeable future? 1-3 years? Or longer?
Barclays Sponsors, HC, Lev Fin, Retail, P&U / Industrials (one group now after co-heads left for Guggenheim) are strong
Citi M&A and Industrials are strong
How does Barclays TMT perform?
Interested in NYC and London if possible.
not as strong as the others
.
Citi/CS/BarCap/BAML are very comparable. GS/MS/JPM are one "tier" above. You will have the same PE exit opps from all 7 of these firms if you are well prepared though.
Hard to argue that the ops wont be better at MS/GS/JP
What ops do you have at MS/GS/JPM that you won't have from Citi/CS/BarCap/BAML? Do you think the best PE firms only take people from MS/GS/JPM? Are there headhunters that exclusively talk to MS/GS/JPM analysts? No. A top bucket analyst at Citi/CS/BarCap/BAML will always outplace a mid-bottom bucket at MS/GS/JPM.
lmao I dont think you know how it works. The headhunters ask the current associates at places like Carlyle, Apollo, etc. how their former groups perform and if they would recommend them. Then the headhunters will specifically reach out to those groups- and most of the time it is GS/MS/JPM. Obviously you are not disqualified coming from UBS, but I doubt there will be many headhunters reaching out to you
Incoming analyst — I don’t think you get how it works.
1) Headhunters just want to get paid, it’s their job to reach out to as many people as possible. I promise you they reach out to UBS analysts lol
2) All they care about is whether or not you’ll get an offer. If you are a crappy analyst at MS (yes, believe it or not, they exist), you will get beat out by a kid from a no-name boutique (crazy, I know)
3) Did you known over the past several years, GS hasn’t been in the top 3 placing banks during PE on-cycle recruiting? Before you have a little WSO heart attack, take a breath. Think about bank culture and recruiting. Goldman has been notoriously harsh when it comes to PE recruiting. That makes it much more difficult for those analysts to place than a solid analyst from a low tier bank who has support recruiting. Headhunters are hyper aware of this.
I interviewed at multiple mega funds and had numerous interviewers who came from lower-tier banks (according to wso). NOBODY CARES. Be better than those around you and you’ll get an offer.
I acknowledge that a better name, or a better group at a certain bank, will do nothing but help you. But don’t for a second believe that they’ll lower the bar for you because you’re in PJT RX. At most they’ll feel safer assuming you know your shit. But the second they feel you don’t know it better than the Citi kid, you’re out.
Source: I’ve been through the process and know a few headhunters personally.
hahahhahahah you think any associates give af about their former groups current performance? my fund is mostly gs/ms/jpm but its because the qualities that made us successful in IB recruiting made us successful in PE recruitng
I don't think you understand what I'm saying. If you're in a good group at Citi/CS/BarCap/BAML (and perform well), you have the same opportunities available to you as if you came from a good group at MS/GS/JPM.
CS Sponsors is still top for MF PE exits, but almost every incoming SA wants that group. Taking into account how placement works, I'm too risk-averse to pick CS if I have a Citi/Barclays offer.
I'd pick Barclays b/c of in-house M&A across coverage groups, so even if placement doesn't work out, you still get good modeling experience, which is what you want for PE exits. Also, I heard Citi culture is meh, while Barclays is the best culture BB. If you're in one of the legacy Lehman Brothers groups: great PE exits, great deal experience, and great culture.
For reference, I know CS does in-house M&A across 4 of their coverage group. Also, historically, CS LevFin, Sponsors, and M&A ALWAYS place extremely well. I have heard BarCap has a great culture though.
What CS groups do in-house M&A? Not doubting, just curious
Barclays is going to be your best bet for culture out of the "mid-tier" BBs of CS/Baml/Citi/Barclays. Out of these 4, BAML/Barclays will also have the best MF PE placement on average. If you can land CS sponsors or Citi M&A I would take those opportunities as well.
Lmao I would love to know how you somehow determined that Barclays categorically has the best “culture” (whatever that means to you) of all of those banks. And further, how you were able to decipher exactly which banks place the best into MF PE, “on average.” All of that knowledge from an internship with one firm! Remarkable!
Won't comment on placements but to be honest I agree that Barclays has the best culture out of all of the BBs if judging by the median group, there does seem to be a unified culture there as opposed to the more group by group feel of other banks including mine. This is just based off my experiences and anecdotes from friends. Who knows, Barclays might actually be awful and crush their analysts.
Out of these three firms, Barclays has the highest number decent groups for PE. All three also have weak groups to avoid, most especially at CS.
Regardless, can guarantee you this choice won't affect how you do in PE recruiting. MFs could fill their whole classes just from analysts at GS but you'll find CS, Barclays, Citi, and yes even DB/UBS at top funds as well.
How is BAML compared the these three for IB? Comparable to Citi? Better than the other two?
Better than CS for sure, wouldn't say its better than Citi/Barclays
Impedit voluptas tempore eos vitae autem magni. Minus incidunt impedit numquam eligendi asperiores consectetur neque. Error nostrum cupiditate minima molestiae explicabo quia.
In qui officia tenetur voluptate libero inventore. Nam aspernatur voluptate nemo repellat placeat esse numquam.
Omnis assumenda facere vero aperiam ut. Cupiditate sed tempore voluptas qui. Dolore ab consectetur quod deleniti.
Reprehenderit debitis in debitis id et pariatur. Reprehenderit facere nulla illo aperiam ratione quaerat non voluptatem.
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...
Omnis occaecati repellendus et aliquid aliquam. Rerum voluptates reiciendis dolore facere magni harum qui fugiat. Error tempora et eos autem autem explicabo. Dignissimos labore accusamus laboriosam numquam debitis praesentium. Laudantium quaerat fugiat et accusamus iusto est. Quis sit at in iure quod. Hic officiis eos optio illo.