Coverage vs M&A
can someone please explain to me the difference between coverage and M&A groups at an investment bank, like JPM for example. is one more process driven and the other more modeling or wha? thanks in advance
Trending Content - Investment Banking Forum
Career Resources
It overlaps but coverage bankers usually hold client relationship and m&a is managing execution and more hands on with the juniors. The best bankers analyst to MD start in M&A and move to coverage from my experience
Speaking for JPM, yes, the M&A team holds pen on model
think its pretty covered by other commenters but for some nuance
it also depends on the bank, some will have M&A run by cov like GS, barc
more niche groups like FIG, O&G will also do alot more modelling themselves because m&a bankers may not be as experienced in their valuation techniques
Sof
In the simplest terms, you have people focused on bringing in business versus executing on that promise - that's coverage versus M&A.
Could also describe it as: coverage handles work and brings expertise related to industry-specific asks (comps, buyers, M&A targets, synergy analysis, qualitative knowledge around the business/industry) whereas M&A teams bring expertise to transaction structures and how to actually get those structures done (e.g., client company wants to merge with another public company? Here's the math that you need to assess if its a good idea, and here's what we gotta do to actually make it happen). Coverage reels them in, but then you actually need someone in the room who understands the value creation and acc/dil math, and how to make the deal work.
Another way to look at it is: For pitching, you deal with large, demanding clients, and its super competitive to win business so coverage needs to demonstrate a lot of industry knowledge and build relationships to set the field to win the business. M&A needs to show up and explain the analysis. If you win the business, you need to execute on it. If its a vanilla sell-side then coverage needs to build the qualitative stuff like presentations and identify/contact the buyers, whereas M&A typically does the model, tracks buyer interactions, coordinates diligence, does a lot of boring shit TBH (but also does the cooler technical analysis IMO).
From a senior perspective, the best M&A bankers are effectively "coverage" as well. While they may only focus on M&A, M&A is relevant to almost any client in the space, whether the buyside or sellside
They may not be joining a meeting that is ECM financing focused, but they should still be holding a meaningful relationship with key decision makers at a client. Ultimately if you're doing sellside M&A, you need someone who can pick up the phone and call the heads of BD at each large strategic acquirer, or even better have relationships with the ultimate decision makers (CEO/CFO, etc.) and can make the right call at the right time, or provide insights
The insights you're able to provide, and how that reads through to process, deal negotiation, etc. is what will make you invaluable, whether you're "coverage" or "M&A"
Vel ullam assumenda corrupti velit tenetur nulla ut. Adipisci beatae et quia occaecati consequatur ipsa qui sit. Mollitia vel blanditiis nulla rerum deleniti voluptates architecto voluptas. Facilis quod sed dolor pariatur atque suscipit.
Officiis quis iusto et est in quis dolorum distinctio. Incidunt praesentium nihil aut maxime beatae. Molestias ea et quia eveniet repudiandae architecto. Nobis tenetur et eos est eius. Veritatis laboriosam illum neque voluptas rerum velit aspernatur. Magnam aut sit sapiente deserunt est.
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...