EVR MP vs CVP MP vs LAZ SF vs MOE SF

Exits: EVR MP / MOE SF / LAZ SF > CVP MP

Comp: CVP MP > EVR MP / MOE SF > LAZ SF

Overall: EVR MP > MOE SF / LAZ SF > CVP MP

Out of these EVR Menlo is the best option. Team has poached a lot of seniors from GS TMT & Citi over the last couple of years

how do these compare with the bulge brackets such as JPM SF, MS Menlo, and GS TMT?

Moe SF goated, yall tripping

Moelis Tech (both SF and NY but SF more severe) post SVB absorption embodies every negative thing about Moelis that this forum talks about. Long hours are granted, non-target + shitty early career background leading to extreme chip on their shoulders, internal gossip to shit on little things, and judging every single thing that someone does while smiling/seeming friendly on the outside. Deep down, no one really trusts anyone but observes/judges everything. Moelis SF prior to the acquisition was one of the best in terms of culture at the firm but now it's probably one of the worst groups on the street with toxic culture. There is absolutely no reason to go to Moelis SF. 

Sounds like all the people that got fired is out here shitting on the place

I'd go with EVR MP if you want to prioritize exits & deal flow or CVP MP if you are into culture. LAZ SF & MOE SF are a step below these two in terms of overall quality

Don't do MOE , shit culture and subpar deal quality. Exits are not everything. EVR MP / CVP MP better shops overall no question. Not sure about LAZ SF

EVR MP is the best positioned out of these firms. Great trajectory and dealflow, growing their senior MD base with impressive hires from GS TMT.

CVP MP does mostly strategic consulting like work. David^2 exit to Tidal definitely hurt them, but at the end of the day it's still a great platform to join (I believe they advised on the Meta-Scale AI deal recently).

LAZ SF used to be good, but it has lost some seniors over the last couple of years, culminating in the loss of key clients such as IBM (eg they haven't worked on the recent IBM-Hashicorp deal), or Google (eg they haven't worked on the recent Google-Wiz deal).

Moelis SF has a strong dealflow but it's for sure a couple of tiers below in terms of deal quality compared to EVR MP/ CVP MP. Mostly MM-LMM, sponsor backed deals. Exits are quite good for what it's worth, though culture can be toxic. 

MOE tech is one of the worst tech groups on the street. The group head breathes down all of the MDs necks and it trickles down to consistent 4-5ams at the analyst level. MDs are middling producers tied to sponsor backed software assets, so you’re not going to have the strategic dealflow / fees that the rainmakers at other firms bring in. ED/VP level is bloated, causing a ton of busy work as they try to impress MDs and not get fired.

Bonuses this year were absolute trash, with $65k cash + $15K deferred for AN2 working consistent 100 hour weeks.

Exits are in line with the MM / bottom bulge banks like WB, Barclays, HL. Definitely doesn’t garner anywhere near the same respect from headhunters or firms as EVR / MS. You’re not going to get looks from most MFs unless you have an angle (great university, networking, etc).

Therefore, no real benefit for working here. Middling experience and exits, with shit pay and hours. Would avoid if you have an offer from any of these other firms.

I see alot of factually incorrect information here. I have made many posts about the SF Tech and broader Tech landscape with a very unbiased opinion (check my historical posts). I have spent a decade of my career competing in tech investment banking at a very solid firm and I will give my assessment on the landscape and the views about Moelis and others as I actively compete against them. First off congrats if you have offers at all of these great firms. 

My word vomit about the career, Moelis, your original question. Feel free to ask me any questions. 

1. Investment banking is long hours, even more so in the boutiques. If you dont want to do this then dont go to one of them. Are some better than others, sure but honestly not by much.
2. Dont focus solely on prestige, at a certain point it matters less. Once you are at a good enough firm its really going to be on you as it relates to exits and you should choose which firm for other reasons like people you want to spend your time with. If you go to a firm like Lazard, or Moelis, or PJT and cant get "good offers" on the buyside, guess what its probably not the bank.
3. Moelis has been historically unproductive in true tech until they hired the SVB/UBS team
4. Moelis is now from what i have heard the largest group at Moelis and the largest from a fee perspective.
5. Moelis is a formidable force that my firm and my friends at Evercore, JPM etc. compete with on a daily basis for large sponsor backed sell sides. We see them relatively less in large corporate work, starting to see them more, but they have wood to chop there. But in sponsor backed sell sides in the 1-5bn range, they have strong share. If you think, otherwise you candidly have no idea about this market or what you are talking about.
6. My firm, Evercore, Moelis, Lazard and other boutiques have small deals and we have large deals. We take on deals based on fees we think we will earn and sometimes as favors to our clients to help us win something larger. Guess what if you take on a 200m sell side deal. Most of WSO would say oh thats a crappy small deal, your firm sucks. But take a step back. What if you are making 2.5-3%? You are actually making more then some large banks who are "doing M&A" but really getting a 1-2m tip on a 1bn dollar deal and M&A cred for doing the financing. What you see on the league tables is not actually the reality in most situations, unless you are Qatalyst. They are real.  Also i have done over 100bn of M&A in my career and i have learned more on the small, gritty deals then any of the clean multi billion dollar deals i have done. Are they as sexy, no but not everything should be about prestige, it should be about learning and broadening your experience set for whatever you do in your career.

7. As it relates to your original question

   1. Evercore - Good for strategic and  sponsor work
   2. Moelis - Good for sponsor work
   3. CVP - Good for hours and compensation and select large strategic work, however they are weak in tech. They do at most 40-50m of fee a year and concentrated in a couple large deals where the work you do really doesnt have you learn anything tbh
   4. Lazard - Good for some sponsor work and some strategic work, but really trailed off materially in last few years

   5. If you care about exits to PE - Choose Evercore or Moelis, if you want to optimize comp and work life balance - choose Centerview. Lazard is fine but i would take Evercore or Moelis over them

   8. Also to the people who say that Moelis is one of the worst groups on the street (specifically targeted at the person above), im sure they have their issues like all our firms do, but that is just so factually incorrect that it makes legitimate concerns that you may raise impossible to take seriously. There is so much we can do better in this industry, but making hyperbolas comments like that lead to people just discounting what you say or the spread of incorrect information. 

That I can’t opine on, but would agree that if you are going to spend a lot of your time somewhere then you better like the people you work with, which is why I am at the firm I am and have chosen to not “uptier” to a marginally better firm just for slightly better name brand. Back to my original comment, once you are in a good tier of firm, other things imo should weigh more. 

The broader point I was trying to make is there are people saying they are shit, which I disagree with and have heard from my own clients annoyingly that they are strong, but that doesn’t mean that it’s a good place to work. 

I can’t speak to Moelis itself, but I think you may be surprised by the amount of small deals that others take on as well. I took on 150m sell side, which is way lower then what our typical deal size is. Client said I will pay you 4mn bucks and make sure you are well positioned on a larger deal that I care a lot about. So I do it and is it profitable yes. Maybe Moelis is willing to do more, but the bulge brackets are trying to come down market because they are getting blown out of the water by the boutiques like Moelis, evercore, cvp, Lazard  in larger m&a. I think in today’s m&a market the lines of where people compete has gone away a lot and it’s now dictated by does it make financial sense for me to compete there. And once again not saying go work at Moelis, I’m just saying if you take an objective look, non emotional view of the practice they are successful but doesn’t mean that I want to work there.