have not found a solid, up-to-date thread on GHL. I know it’s not the place it used to be but how far is it from being an EB. Exit opps/culture/compensation/analyst experience? Would anyone choose GHL over a low-tier BB?
| +131 | New Article: Dramatic Slide as UBS #22 (US) & New Leadership Desperately Needed | 25 | 19h |
| +121 | Americas M&A League Table Q2 Updated | 55 | 2h |
| +76 | Wealthy Parents / Jaded | 24 | 1d |
| +61 | A COMPLETE GUIDE TO SUMMER INTERNSHIP RECRUITING | 11 | 1d |
| +59 | How are hours rn for SA (interns) | 31 | 1d |
| +44 | Boutique firm wants access to my LinkedIn? | 38 | 5h |
| +33 | Investment Banking in Mexico | 9 | 1d |
| +30 | Investment Banking is Hard | 13 | 7h |
| +27 | Restructuring: Anti-climactic Experience | 3 | 9h |
| +21 | Excel macros for QOL formatting | 0 | 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.
How is it not an EB?
I know two kids who work there in NY. One of them leaves the office at like 8pm every night.. the other like 11pm. Still have a three year analyst program which is something to note as a lot of banks are promoting or kicking you out after two. In terms of dealflow, I imagine not great to be honest. I've never crossed paths with them on anything. I'd imagine it's mostly mm work. Probably a good bank if you care about work life balance at least in NY and fine with mostly mm exits.
Well-above street comp and lean teams, but definitely not what it use to be. More of a strong upper-MM rather than EB. Would take a low/mid BB or JEF over it at this point (this is for NA).
nobody is taking DB, UBS, Jefferies over Greenhill dude
I wasn't referring to UBS/DB at all. Those are not BBs and yes GHL is a better pick (at least surely not UBS). I was referring to CS/RBC/Barclays. Jefferies has a very strong platform with some great growth and deal flow over the last few years while GHL has trended in the opposite direction during a period where just about everyone else (besides some of the European banks) have been growing. GHL only serious advantage is being so lean and it's why they are able to grab such high quality analysts.
You going to RBC?
I know this site has a huge hard on for RBC but in no world should they be compared to CS/Barclays
Wow RBC again... That guy who shits on RBC needs to come to this thread. Sorry to break it to you: No one is choosing RBC over Greenhill. No one is choosing RBC over CS / Barclays. Even doubt anyone's choosing RBC over DB / UBS / Jefferies.
Note that GHL is really small - typical analyst class is around 10. Know a couple people who work there, and while they don't do a ton of big deals in absolute numbers, the class is so small that everyone is getting quality experience.
How are folks assessing whether GHL is an EB? Deal volume? They’re a fraction of the size of most other boutiques and purely focus on M&A / Restructuring. Analyst class has incredibly strong placements still and, from what I hear, culture is amazing with great work / life balance.
Love when Interns / College kids post shit they know nothing about.
Not a whole lot of good Greenhill info out there so I'll try to contribute what I can from experience/talking to others. Feel free to PM.
On the Rx side, the team was growing fast and doing well before the Covid-induced recession. Of course, heavy dealflow now; many deals aren't public but you can see some on Reorg. Class size of 3 analysts expanded to 6, added multiple MDs. The team works hard but relatively little facetime and seniors are willing to put in a good word for you on the buyside when recruiting time comes around. Culture has improved and isn't the same as it was at Rothschild. Still a small sample at this point since the group is new, but exits have included Centerbridge, Cerberus, TPG Sixth Street, and a credit hedge fund.
Mostly accurate on the M&A side. Deal flow can be variable (as banker832 alluded to), but you also need to remember how small the class size is. Analysts seem to enjoy the experience with good culture and solid exit ops. You can search these on past WSO posts or LinkedIn; many end up at top UMM firms (ie., Vista Equity, CD&R, Lindsay Goldberg, Silver Lake). Some BB groups might be different, but my friends at the BBs have typically been one of many analysts on a deal.
FWIW, Greenhill's interview was one of the hardest that I went through while recruiting (I'm from a semi-target that had supers at most of the EBs).
Seems like they're pretty selective not just on smarts but also fit as well. Analyst class is probably solid
Greenhill vs Guggenheim Rx?
Guggenheim RX. The combined Millstein platform is very strong and from what I've heard has good culture. Recently mandated on American Airlines
Guggenheim generalist definitely over GHL, but Gugg's RX practice is relatively weak and is pretty new though I foresee good things from it in the future. Slight edge to GHL RX only.
My two cents’ on GHL: (overall, very positive)
However:
There has been a lot of attention on how banks respond to Covid. If GHL follows Citi’s internship approach (e.g., guaranteed FT offers, full 10-weeks pay, shortened / virtual internship), as well as maintains the GHL sign-on / minority bonuses, then I believe GHL will re-gain the street credit the bank used to wield.
Greenhill was what Evercore is now 10-15 years ago. Since then, they've been on a steady decline and can and should not be considered an EB (in my humble opinion the only true EBs right now are Lazard, Evercore, Centerview). From what I understand, culture and comp is good at the analyst level but light deal flow and weak brand name recognition. Mostly MM deals and many top bankers have left or the ones hanging around are no longer at top of their game
You wouldn't consider Moelis an EB? Seriously?
Wow. Posted for the first time in a while out of boredom and surprised I got hit with 14 MS's. I happened to have come from a complete non-target with a blue collar family background and have now been in this industry for more than half a decade. I think I know a thing or two more than these dimwit college kids who now get offers before they've even lost their virginity.
Moelis? I don't consider a firm that does a ton of small MM deals with a ton of mediocre pitch-heavy MDs an "EB." Moelis may have been top 15 in the league tables last year but they were in the 20s the year before (as well as in 2017 if my memory serves right). That's on worse on paper than Jefferies, Rothschild, Guggenheim, and BNP Paribas.
PWP? They're incredibly overrated and always have been. I remember when they were founded, they came out of the gate with incredible hype and big name hires, but never established itself among Evercore, Lazard, Centerview (side note: when they were founded in 2006, Greenhill was on par or better than Evercore, and Lazard was the top EB by miles and miles. There was also Gleacher & Co., which didn't last but was considered a real EB for some time.) Additionally, just by having the names "Perella" and "Weinberg" doesn't make them a top, elite firm so no, I would not categorize them as an "EB." I don't remember the last time they cracked top 20 league tables and other than a few one-offs, you just don't see them around the most high profile transactions. They were supposed to go public last year, but that whole process stalled because of lack of investor interest in the company and its overall performance.
PJT? Rising star but I would not put them in the same category yet as the three firms I keep alluding to. They had a good year last year driven by ~3-4 huge deals. In 2-3 years I could see them mentioned among those top 3, but for now have much to prove.
As I said this is all my opinion. Open to debating. If not, you can just listen to advice from "financestudent2020"
PS: Talk to anyone who's actually been in the industry for the past 3+ years. No one in their right mind considers PWP or Moelis in the same league as Evercore/Lazard/Centerview. PJT maybe, but definitely not PWP or Moelis.
The fact that you are using M&A league table standing as barometer for boutique firm success/quality really demonstrates your lack of understanding of the boutique business model - they don't chase scale and are not trying to be "everything to everyone"
Part of the reason MDs leave BBs to join EBs is that they are the afforded the opportunity and latitude to focus on the situations and clients of their choosing, without a group head breathing down their neck about making budget or why they weren't on the ticket for an M&A deal that printed that morning
Interesting, but I disagree with your thinking. How do YOU define "EB" exactly? Do people not put these firms in this category because of their deal success, as opposed to business model?
People on WSO and sites like M&I use the term Elite Boutique to list names of firms that have top deal volume success. So yes, league tables absolutely should be used as a barometer.
If not, why don't you just call every MM/Boutique an "Elite Boutique" ??? I mean heck, if you think EBs are just firms that BB MDs leave for, why don't you call Union Square Advisors an EB? They have bankers who came from BAML, Barclays, etc.