10 Comments
 
Best Response

It is difficult and a little silly to calculate total asset value (i.e. EV) for banks for a few reasons: 1) How do you handle interest expense/income? Banks use debt differently than other companies. Debt is really their cost of goods sold and if you think of deposits at debt, then the interest on that debt is usually the biggest expense item on their income statement. It's not immediately clear if debt is a raw material, a source of capital or some combination of both. This makes EBITDA and FCF bad measures of cash generation 2) What is capex/reinvestment for a bank? Tradition firm must maintain and achieve growth through capex, which we take out of EBTIDA to get to FCF, but banks don't really have "capex" on their balance sheet. Their reinvestments are really in people and infrastructure, so it's hard to take the income statement/cash flow statement and distinguish between operating expenses and reinvestment

Because of this, it makes more sense to identify cash flows to equity and measure their present value. This is why you use DDM, residual income, P/E, and P/B for banks.

 

I think about P/B a little bit differently. P/B is the price you are paying for the net value of the assets (accounting value). Since measuring firm value is difficult as discussed above, we are really interested in measuring equity value. P/B gives us a sense for what the market thinks about the earning power of the bank's net assets (as BV is just total assets - total liabilities i.e., book value of equity). A high P/B means that the market values the assets at a significant premium relative to their book value. A low P/B implies the opposite, and a P/B 1 means a firm is not earning it's cost of equity capital. We use P/TBV just because tangible book value is less distorted by accounting choices over intangible assets, especially goodwill. TBV will not be materially different for two firms, one which grew organically and the other which grew through acquisitions, whereas P/BV could be very different for those two firms, even if all else was equal.

Are you planning to do FIG banking?

 

Good luck. No additional advice, you seem to be asking the right questions. Be prepared for why FIG, what trends there are in the FIG space, why MM vs. BB. Also FIG bankers will occasionally ask regular valuation questions, so don't forget those.

Hopefully be prepared to talk about a deal. There haven't been a ton recently in the banks space, but there are other things going on (Ally Financial selling international operations, Barclays buying ING deposits, Capital One acquired some ING business awhile back).

 

You could definitely still get asked things like "Walk me through a DCF?", "What are three ways to value a company?" etc etc. There are a couple of reasons for this: 1) Not all FIG is banks. There are lots of EBITDA based businesses in the FIG practice (maybe less so at your MM, but who knows). Asset managers and fintech are more traditional businesses 2) They don't always expect you to know everything about bank valuation. Sometimes they just want to see if you're smart and have done your homework, so they may ask standard questions

For trends, look at the FT financials section, look through old dealbook articles for financials deals. If you have access to CapIQ or another database use that. A primer on banks: 1) Low interest rates has led to NIM (net interest margin) compression, hurting profitability 2) Loan growth is slow. Banks are more conservative in new loans and there just aren't that many opportunities to make new good loans. This is tied in with the overall sluggish economy 3) These two things have put a lot of pressure on bank earnings. Consolidation is one way to address this (cost synergies, gaining market power, lower funding). We may be in store for a lot of upcoming consolidation in smaller regional banks 4) One bright spot is housing, which has been trending up. This is good for banks and their mortgage portfolios and origination. 5) Related to point 3), Dodd-Frank and Basel III compliance costs are going to hurt smaller banks. One way to mitigate this is consolidation. Compliance costs are fixed to a certain extent, so there can be large economies of scale when dealing with regulatory costs.

 

Consequatur sequi illum perspiciatis veritatis repellat. Consequatur unde sequi assumenda dolorem facere est quia. Quia aperiam consectetur officia ullam amet id consequatur. Aspernatur hic praesentium consequatur harum esse occaecati. Beatae nisi in quos impedit quaerat.

Career Advancement Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.8%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.2%
  • Guggenheim Partners 01 97.7%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Morgan Stanley 01 98.8%
  • Evercore 01 98.2%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.6%
  • Banco Santander 01 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Evercore No 98.8%
  • Morgan Stanley 05 98.2%
  • JPMorgan No 97.7%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (14) $434
  • Associates (43) $259
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (22) $179
  • Intern/Summer Associate (13) $156
  • 1st Year Analyst (75) $151
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (67) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
4
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
5
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
6
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
7
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
8
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
9
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
10
Linda Abraham's picture
Linda Abraham
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”