Do league tables really tell you anything about a firm/how good/culture besides actual $Value of deals?
It seems like everyone is obsessed with league tables and just the general ones from financial times and WSJ but do they really tell you that much? All it really seems to tell you is $Value of deals the firm has done and ranks firms that way... but that does not tell you about complexity of deals/partners involved etc right?
Why is everyone so obsessed with these? It seems like some bulge brackets are not even listed on the tables?
Trying to decipher top M&A players: https://markets.ft.com/data/league-tables/tables-and-trends
.
League tables give you rough approximation of deal flow but other than they are rather in uninformative especially when it comes to deal attribution for balance sheet banks like the big BBs. Banks that are on the acquisition financing side will often ask their clients to give them fees attributable to M&A even though they have nothing to do with the actual M&A advisory, just so they can juice their league table numbers. Additionally, there are quite a number of deals that go undisclosed due to client guidance and may not be counted within the league tables.
League Tables - Do all parts of most banks care? (Originally Posted: 12/23/2007)
Do all parts of most banks (e.g. S&T, Equity Research, etc.) care about League Tables, or is it just IBD?
Ea qui at quibusdam ad quo consequatur. Reprehenderit architecto iusto sed maxime itaque reprehenderit. Pariatur laborum ullam id qui quia.
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...