Edited: made my decision and am very happy with it. Appreciate all the helpful comments on this post and hope it might help someone else in the future :)
| +404 | Evercore Intern Seizure | 62 | 59m |
| +98 | UBS IB Americas has failed, now behind Santander and Stiffel | 27 | 1h |
| +79 | JPM M&A is Gone??? Purely Coverage Banking??? | 41 | 8m |
| +60 | How do I understand vs. just memorizing? | 11 | 4h |
| +48 | Losing my personality in Banking | 9 | 1d |
| +45 | The good and bad with Wells Fargo | 12 | 3h |
| +42 | Associate & Above IB exits | 18 | 6h |
| +35 | Sent my Claude prompt to 200+ Teams chat. MD wants to see me Monday. | 18 | 8h |
| +33 | Incoming IB Analyst: Best Ways to Prepare? | 13 | 3h |
| +31 | Tech to IB Pivot | 20 | 17h |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
for SA offers GS and MS do generalist within IB. So like IB Classic SA offers or MS IBD offers, again without a group. Placement is done in a couple of months time through internal networking. JPM does group specific I think.
I know this sounds rote but just take GS. Their return offer rate is a little lower than MS or JPM, but it's not terribly bad, and if you got offers at all 3 you're probably more than capable enough to get a return.
The culture at GS is a little bit cut-throat and competitive, but it's Goldman and being there will open more doors down the road all things being equal. Also, the Classic offer guarantees you won't get stuck in Capital Markets groups, unlike JPM. And since their M&A is done mostly by the coverage groups, you're much more likely to get quality M&A exposure than if you didn't get M&A at the other firms. Also, the building and area downtown is much quieter and nicer than midtown, especially MS which is right in the middle of the Times Square cesspool.
MS has a very bro-ey, athlete culture and isn't doing as well lately in terms of deal mandates, overall performance, etc. Obviously still very top, but isn't giving GS/JP/BAML as much of a run for their money as they typically have.
JP is cool, good firm in general. Some groups have amazing culture, some have absolute shit culture with asshole MDs who have a stick so far up their ass I'm surprised it's not coming out their mouth. But idk, GS is better in pretty much every way unless you really want to be at a big universal bank.
First off, I would go with GS at analyst level assuming two and out is your goal. However, I just pulled up M&A league tables and GS is 1 with 457 Bn / 256 deals and MS is #2 with 446 Bn / 254 deals so not sure what commenter above is talking about. Citi is 3 with 364 Bn / 177 deals. This is Bloomberg.
MS