Comp at Top MM Firms?
Is pay at a top MM firm comparable with that of BB and EBs? Would anybody take a PJ Solomon, William Blair etc offer over GS, JPM? Or a "lower" BB?
Trending Content - Investment Banking Forum
| +407 | Evercore Intern Seizure | 62 | 10h |
| +116 | UBS IB Americas has failed, now behind Santander and Stiffel | 33 | 35m |
| +79 | JPM M&A is Gone??? Purely Coverage Banking??? | 44 | 2m |
| +60 | How do I understand vs. just memorizing? | 11 | 13h |
| +49 | Some banks are overrated as fuck | 14 | 2h |
| +48 | Associate & Above IB exits | 18 | 15h |
| +48 | The good and bad with Wells Fargo | 15 | 2h |
| +41 | Sent my Claude prompt to 200+ Teams chat. MD wants to see me Monday. | 24 | 43m |
| +36 | Incoming IB Analyst: Best Ways to Prepare? | 13 | 12h |
| +31 | Tech to IB Pivot | 20 | 1d |
Career Resources
Wouldn’t take a MM over a top BB, but I accepted a top MM SA over a lower BB due to group selection (got a group specific offer at the MM vs unknown at BB) and I liked MM culture better. Comp is similar, if anything a place like Blair will pay more than BB but less than EB.
Taking into consideration comp, culture, exit opps, etc. I'd say Blair is the best MM
Jefferies is the top. Bad culture, but top MM
Lol. No, it isn’t.
How so? Jefferies is ahead of UBS / DB and likely Barclays this year in IB league tables. Are you saying JEF is not a MM? Honestly JEF needs way way more respect - it is 10x better firm then people are giving credit for
I’d say the top MM are probably Blair/HL/Baird, though different groups are best at each. HW, Lincoln, Piper are probably the next best group, though again very group dependent.
Short answer: if by "top mm" you mean Blair/Baird then the pay is comparable to BBs or higher and its all cash.
Long answer about choosing a MM: Really depends if you are talking analyst only or post MBA/looking to be a career banker.
At the analyst level, I totally get the BB obsession for mega fund looks. While these top MM firms still place strongly in PE, its an uphill battle for the largest funds, however that's probably true even at most BBs.
Post-MBA and/or with an eye toward climbing the ladder at a bank, the considerations are totally different. Top candidates at my program consistently self-selected toward the Bairds/Blairs of the world. I personally know more than one individual who turned down mid/top BB groups because they could genuinely see themselves at the culture of a top MM long term. I also personally know people who didn't get interviews with Baird/Blair who ended up at Citi/UBS/CS/RBC/Wells.
^ Put another way...if you think strong candidates at Booth and Kellogg end up at Baird/Blair because they couldn't get a BB offer...you're dead wrong.
I had another post recently but the MM term is pretty silly given that deals stretch from 20 million dollar mom and pop shops (regional boutiques) to 200m-1b+ substantial businesses (top MMs). The top MMs do strong work and you could argue make up for lower dollar values with higher volume (would you rather have three 500m sell-sides under your belt or one 2 billion deal? differences of opinion obviously).
Interned at Blair/Baird and if I think it would be an awesome place to be a career banker.
private partnership, so all the firms earnings are distributed to partners. Most EBs and all BBs are public, so there’s a way worse distribution of the earnings pool. Along with this comes cash bonuses, which is really to not have lots of money tied up in stock, don’t need to worry about vesting schedules.
better culture. People are just less douchey and cutthroat. Obviously there’s exceptions and I’m sure there’s some good cultural groups at BBs, but my bank literally everyone was super nice, way better than people I interviewed/networked with at BBs.
more internal promotion. My firm has multiple MDs that started as analysts and made MD by their early 30s. You then have a good 20-30 years as an MD making millions a year. It’s just a way more direct route to the top then a BBs where there seems to be a huge bottleneck at a few promotion points.
easier, more consistent deal flow. I’m sure being an MD at GS is incredibly stressful because a single deal can make or break you career and there’s insane pressure to bring in huge deals. With MM deals, it’s a lot easier to find companies looking to sell and, from my understanding, it’s a lot easier to source deals from a top MM. if you’re a BB MD, you’re often competing against a whole cohort of BBs and EBs for a deal. With MMs, if you’re at one of Blair/Baird/HL you are already one of the clear leaders in the space. At my firm, my group rarely pitched and typically just fielded inbounds, and we often turned down mandates because the MDs were constantly at capacity.
Baird is about to raise comp. Based on the year we've had (firm has set an annual revenue record in some groups, and it's only June), people have very high expectations.
Honestly, Baird is doing a lot of things right lately. The last thread here went to leadership and they've been making some big changes as a result. (1) Protected weekends now start earlier on Fridays and go later on Sundays; (2) there are mandatory 4 day off weekends with "fun" bonuses so we can get away; (3) the retention bonuses are about to hit in a week;(4) along with covering dinner, Baird is now covering lunch for everyone in the office; (5) and the go-forward hybrid model is only three days in office, the rest of the week is WFH. Plus they've been cracking down on poor behavior, Baird just fired that VP who sent that e-mail that went viral lately.
The head of IB has been pushing hard to improve the junior banker experience. It's early, but it seems sincere.