Title says it. Absolute unprofessionals with zero technical ability. Alway trying to find “how we can be helpful” for client. A client who doesn’t even know your fucking name.
Stop
Literally no relationships and zero value add. Breathing down everyone’s neck with “how are the materials looking?”
Pls just fuck off if you’re reading this. You are not appreciated!
| +286 | UBS Tech MD hires Son (from no-name college) as an Intern | 49 | 17h |
| +166 | WTF IS THIS COMPETITON | 59 | 1d |
| +124 | Is banking in the south more sustainable? | 29 | 12h |
| +101 | The Intern Starter Pack | 17 | 4h |
| +76 | Current State of the League Tables | 28 | 1d |
| +66 | [Official] 2026 IB Analyst Bonus Megathread (with 2025 Consolidated Pay and Perks/Benefits) | 11 | 9h |
| +51 | Perella Weinberg to Cut 10% of Workforce, Including Partners | 33 | 5h |
| +40 | UBS Groups Ranked by Future Outlook | 20 | 2d |
| +34 | Are all Tech / TMT groups sweaty? | 18 | 1h |
| +32 | PWP Layoffs????? | 18 | 4d |
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.
Dump the model on them once in awhile and just walk away, that will shut them up for awhile.
.
Lol funny you bring this up. Was literally just talking about this with a buddy - how does a sponsors group/banker actually add value? Usually they are not the one sourcing opportunities or have any sort of sector or product expertise (rx/levfin/DCM/ECM) so won't be executing either. Idk, MDs just call on them when they need a sponsor intro? Seems like the easiest/best banking job ever if you're an MD. Just talk about sponsor portcos at a high level all day and maintain your relationships. These guys don’t really do shit
Isn't that basically every MD though? Maintain relationships leave the actual work to underlings? Top tier FSG at the lower levels seem the place to be.
Do you work at an MM in the Midwest?
On a serious note though, there is validity to this viewpoint. Question though is what is the solution. I know a lot of junior bankers in FSG leave to join a product or coverage group at another bank just because the experience wasn't what they were looking for.
The most important value-add FSG does actually produce is creating a single point of contact for a lot of PE clients who don't want to interaction with 10 different coverage groups (and maybe even geographic groups) at the 15+ banks they keep relationships with. A good FSG team should really keep very organised about ongoing discussions, portfolio companies, upcoming fee opportunities (e.g. debt walls). A lot don't.
I don't have the solution, but there's both a problem in most banks, but also a good rationale for having a strong and organised FSG team.
If I could do it again I would have moved to a Sponsors group when I was a VP.
Can be a sweet gig at the more senior levels
Agree. The MD are typically former product bankers with some juice behind them. But I don’t need a Vp who wouldn’t have been promoted from ASO in ANY OTHER group trying to throw his artificial weight around internally
Op sounds like a sweet gig. Any groups hiring
Why then is it the hardest group the crack at most banks? Citi and Barclays have sponsors teams that are impossible to get into without target/serous vetting (we're talking months).
Barclays sponsors runs the model and quarterbacks the deal with help from coverage and levfin. Not all FSG groups are the same.
“The model” - as in the cash flow template that can be ripped in 20 mins
How’s the FSG stint going?
At Citi, the lev fin team is a pure capital markets group so the sponsors team runs the LBO model and does the true lev fin banking work, so analysts get to do a ton of reps on models without having to spend much time pitching for business. This is a different model to, say, GS or JPM where lev fin does their own banking work and modeling so the sponsors group is more of a concierge service
at JPM levfin - we do not hold the pen
I mean you kind of need your sponsors coverage guys to get the asset in front of the relevant buyers. Or can the autistic 23 year old with "le epic modeling skills" pick up the phone and instantly have a meaningful chat with Generic BSD UMM Partner any time he wants to market the deal?
We ain’t talking about model godz. I’m talmbout base level understanding that’s missing. And an air of self importance without doing much other than being pushy busy bodies
Do other people really typically see FSG provide meaningful help in outreach? Maybe in a super broad auction with random buyers, but my experience is much more -
Coverage MD: “I’m having breakfast with the guy who covers all CPG deals at Carlyle next week and I just sold a business for the head of consumer at KKR. Those are the right ones to show the deal to here and I can handle outreach”
FSG MD: “thx, let me know if I can help. Can blast the teaser to every single MD at both firms.”
Like I’ve found coverage bankers are way more thoughtful and typically understand who the right lead is at each fund, whereas FSG just mass emails the teaser and pretends to be some relationship god
Bingo. My main point here is there is no need for FSG juniors.
Actually, if the asset is A-tier the answer is yes... The autistic 23 year old armed with an overengineered teaser can easily get the opportunity in front of any firm. If it is a good business, the firm will ensure it is being reviewed by the right team and seriously considered.
If I hear "we quarterback the deal team" one more time...
They add no value at all. Period. Yet they think they are the shit
The absolute worst
This is very true for FSG groups where:
1) majority of deal volume is in leveraged finance
2) the leveraged finance team underwrites the opportunity
Are they zero value add?
Can you think of a reason why a PE firm would call a FSG banker for an opportunity where they did not have an in-house industry banker?
Maybe you can, but we both know you weren’t the first call
Former FSG junior. Agree with everyone in this thread. The "model" was indeed a cash flow template that can be ripped in 20 minutes. 70% of deal flow was LBO financings jointly underwritten with LevFin. True "deal team quarterback" as mentioned above.
Worked ~55 hours/week on average, now at MF PE and doing fine. 10/10 would do again. Why bust my balls doing le operåting modél in coverage / M&A when I can work half the hours, attend twice the client meetings, and get the same exits? FSG is by far the best ROI group as an analyst.
Bro what bank?
One of CS/BofA/JPM/Citi
Glad to hear you're doing well at the MF and yes you played it right joining FSG. I was at one of those banks a long time ago and completely agree on your take about FSG being the best ROI.
That said, I know a few FSG analysts that had awesomely chill lives in banking, then moved on to PE and inevitably got smoked way worse than their analyst years. A couple only lasted a year at their respective funds.
is this because they didn't develop good skillsets from being in a chill group? (e.g. getting reps in from running deal processes - doing lots of PPT, excel; making models, running various technical analyses for DD requests). seems like it catches up to you in the end since the EB junior banker who got smoked in his analyst years is much better off than the FSG/coverage banker who did like 50 hrs a week
ive always had a question for exiting to PE from a "chill IB" group. did you see any struggles acclimating to PE in terms of excel/ppt skills with these chill hours? I know a few friends at boutiques grinding away getting their "reps" in, digging through data rooms, getting better at making models, running diligence analysis, all eventually leading to a better and more refined skillset in PPT/excel. from other threads, seems like PE is not as collegial so everyone at the junior level just tries to do their work and clock out (e.g. doing tasks for excel/ppt by themselves with maybe little guidance). would love to hear about your thoughts on going to a MF
You still pick up more than sufficient skills in FSG to be a great PE associate. The majority of exits from my old group were to UMM+ PE, and we all do fine. Even in terms of learning, your return on time spent is just that much higher in FSG.
80% of tasks on the job are directly applicable to PE - coming up with due diligence questions (while underwriting an LBO), answering due diligence questions (while syndicating an LBO), thinking about Sponsors' portfolio fit and investment theses, refining the mechanics of an LBO model, digesting 3rd party consultant reports. Even banging your head against credit committee is in some ways comparable to the IC process, albeit admittedly at a much shallower level. Compare this to coverage where analysts spend a lot of time turning sketched-out CIM slides in PowerPoint or spreading comps. Nobody in PE spreads comps. We just get banks to do it.
You're also a generalist across products and industries, so while on average you don't get as deep into every deal as someone in coverage or M&A, you have a much better grasp of what in general makes a better business (vs. industry-specific metrics and KPIs), and a cursory understanding of ECM, DCM, and M&A; which are important for the portfolio management aspect of PE.
Finally, everyone in my group had at least one or two transactions where due to staffing needs, you become a part of the core deal team on a sell-side, buy-side advisory mandate, or IPO. That is, you're an additional body doing the exact same work as someone in coverage or M&A would be doing. Those final deep reps help you gain a deeper understanding of the M&A process and 'under-the-hood' diligence requirements in a way an LBO underwrite just doesn't. But you don't need to do 10 of those to understand how an operating model is built or sell-side process is run.
To summarize, FSG is indeed low on reps in high-intensity work, but if you pay attention that's enough to pick up the granular skills needed to succeed in PE; while the quantity of reps for low-intensity makes you well-rounded.
How are you running the PE Investment model if you have built zero technical skills? Surely you get found out?
EDIT: Why throw MS at me for asking a genuine question?
You're overestimating the difficulty of running a model and overweighting technical skills required in a PE role. base level technical skills are tablestakes, but aren't what drive long-term success in the job.
Could u pm me what bank?
You're not wanted. You're not wanted. - Kendall Roy
Really depends on which bank the FSG team is from, IMHO they do add significant value, but only if done rihgt.
In theory, the FSG banker is supposed to be the one single point of contact for sponsors at their IB. Also in theory, said FSG should be a pro at offering different products to the sponsor client - this means being an expert in Lev Fin products (high yield issuance, refi etc), acquisition opps (keeping your pulse on all industry groups) and also fund solutions (working with your IB's private bank to come up with a capital call facility for the sponsor client, for instance).
The issue sometimes is that because of the competitive dynamics at various IBs, you may have sector bankers who want to "control the client relationship" being the point of contact. Problem with this is obviously you end up with 1) a pissed off FSG banker who has no client relationships 2) the sponsor client has a much more limited exposure to a bank's products (because the sector banker isn't necessarily an expert in high yield issuance, term loan underwriting, equity issuance or capital call facility underwriting).
TLDR - FSG has significant value add if done right, but competitive dynamics within investment banks more often than not torpedo this.
This
What people don’t seem to understand is that different teams and roles aim at maximizing the profits / revenue generated by the bank. Not maximizing the A1 experience so that they can fuck off to PE after a glorious 18 months in IB.
Examples:
It’s pretty cute to think that one (in a full aervice bank) gets hired on key deals through single MD coverage. The reality is that fees & roles reward specific situations & longstanding coverage. I’ve won sell-sides where another bank was added on by the sponsor for reasons out of the deal team’s control.
I’ve also been on deals where our economics on financing were inflated because another sector team got shafted after worked 12 months on a buyside that didn’t pay off. We got a good financing chunk + solid FX contingent hedge deal as a result.
Have also been on p2P where the debt piece got hung in covid. The guy dealing with this wasnt my team (sector). It’s the head of FSG who was dealing with fund execs to make sure we were treated appropriately.
Same things about 3rd position on debt or ecm deals - these deals pay for the bank’s infrastructure & salaries, and are important for the organisation. It may not be the best experience as a junior analyst, but it’s crucial to understand this as these can make or break a D or MD. Sometimes the right strategy is the one that pays the bills, not the ones that sends the analyst to blackstone
What is the experience like for FSG associates and VPs?
Hard to get promoted beyond VP from the few I spoke to. Arguably one of the best groups post MBA if you're able to make it to MD, at least in terms of WLB. Not sure about recently but a few Stern MBA grads always end up in CS Sponsor groups every year and the few I spoke to loved it (this was circa 2019).
After VP you either hope that someone leaves above, creating a vacuum, or you sit in a bank where there is coverage white space giving you an opportunity to step ip.
At my old place there were a couple of good directors who 1) did both FSG and levfin coverage / execution; and 2) did a mix of co-coverage with certain MDs and led the charge on some underserved funds. Typically very hungry / commercial individuals who partnered well with sector teams (i.e. leading with coverage content to help place the bank’s products).
How’s JPM FSG in terms of WLB/modeling/comp/exits?
interested too
I agree - Liverpool's management is a joke.
This is a gross generalization. There are execution-focused FSG teams on the street.
If you're at a bank with an execution-focused one, the FSG team often runs the process including structuring debt/modeling/client contact and approval processes.
Sorry so many of you work at banks with a non-execution FSG team.
do u know which banks have FSG execution teams?
Following
.
Lol, that’s all I’m hearing here.
Recusandae ut aut voluptatem praesentium a qui. Consequatur nam distinctio dolor fuga. Voluptas temporibus voluptatem dolores praesentium. Rem adipisci deserunt doloribus quos. Non blanditiis aperiam autem. Quia pariatur nesciunt omnis sit.
Repellat dolor nemo reiciendis neque in aut. Veniam dolorum enim dolor ullam voluptas. Nihil ipsum nisi nihil velit repellat.
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...
Sed corporis dignissimos blanditiis magni non. Temporibus rem fugiat et recusandae ex voluptatem est. Sit rerum ullam doloremque est voluptas. Dignissimos tempore ipsam assumenda deleniti. Consectetur voluptatem aut eius ratione aperiam id. Quisquam rem voluptas voluptatum et aut dolor et.
Repudiandae qui repudiandae quasi quia sed porro. Non debitis temporibus possimus et et quia. Fugit aperiam voluptates molestias temporibus in aliquid consectetur. Voluptatem quos illo et tempore. Ut odio dolorem facilis maiores occaecati velit doloribus.
Asperiores temporibus accusamus neque aperiam nemo commodi et. Non neque eum deserunt molestias. Doloribus autem soluta doloribus non.
Omnis dolorem odio nesciunt recusandae ratione impedit porro praesentium. Facilis nulla id quidem architecto omnis consequatur sequi. Sit quia earum suscipit consequuntur quisquam officia. Assumenda quia et similique in maxime beatae sunt.
Consequatur perspiciatis rem facere numquam ut. Eos ut nihil commodi iste alias sit quibusdam. Iste quia nulla tempore inventore officiis ipsam consequatur. A velit corporis quo sunt dolor hic sed illo.