Do headhunters are aware of which groups within each banks are good/bad? How would they view someone from a leading industry/product team at Barclays/UBS vs. someone from a weak group at MS/GS/JPM?
In short, is it worth it to join the best group and grind hard at a tier 2 bank or exits will be the same from a less intense team at that bank?
| +124 | If Tik Tok is forced to sell, what banks do you think would be involved in the deal? | 59 | 21h | |
| +85 | Updated LA Banking Scene (2024) | 61 | 18h | |
| +42 | Ranking banks that went under | 26 | 54m | |
| +39 | Burnt Out M&A ASO | 22 | 11h | |
| +37 | Relevance of A-Levels for U.K. London recruiting | 25 | 16h | |
| +34 | Intern Ettiquette | 7 | 1h | |
| +33 | A strategy for SA applicants late to the game like myself | 17 | 13h | |
| +27 | Series 79 Help / Tips to Pass The First Attempt | 11 | 3d | |
| +23 | What are hours like at BBs in London? | 47 | 1d | |
| +23 | 2024 new grads who didnt get return offers update | 10 | 1d |
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.
Based on the most helpful WSO content, headhunters are indeed aware of the reputations of different groups within banks and how they perform. They often have a good understanding of the market and keep track of which groups are considered strong. Here's a breakdown of how they might view candidates from different scenarios:
Leading Industry/Product Team at Barclays/UBS: A candidate from a top group at a bank like Barclays or UBS is likely to be viewed positively. Headhunters understand that these groups have strong deal flows and that the analysts working there have solid experience.
Weaker Group at MS/GS/JPM: Even if a candidate is coming from a less prestigious group within a top bank like Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, or JPMorgan, the overall brand and training of the bank carry weight. However, the candidate may need to demonstrate their individual capabilities and achievements more than someone from a stronger group.
Regarding the decision to join a top group at a tier 2 bank versus a less intense team at a tier 1 bank, it's important to consider the following:
Exit Opportunities: Strong groups at tier 2 banks can provide excellent exit opportunities, especially if you perform well and can leverage that experience. The reputation of the group can sometimes outweigh the overall bank's prestige.
Work Intensity: A less intense team at a tier 1 bank might offer a better work-life balance, but the trade-off might be less hands-on experience and potentially fewer high-profile deals.
Individual Performance: Ultimately, headhunters and future employers will look at your individual performance and contributions. Being a standout analyst in any group can lead to good exit opportunities.
In short, it can be worth it to join the best group at a tier 2 bank and work hard, as this can lead to strong exit opportunities. However, the prestige of tier 1 banks also carries significant weight, and strong performance there can open doors as well. It's a nuanced decision that should be based on personal career goals, work preferences, and the specific opportunities available to you.
Sources: Best Headhunting Shops ?, mid tier bb's and eb comparison, Hedge funds vs. Mutual funds, Networking into a Hedge Fund? It's Unstructured., Citi vs CS vs Barclays for IB
Thats a pretty broad question given the quality of HH varies significantly and their actual knowledge of who they're recruiting for or from varies too. From my experience, HH are looking for an easy fit (e.g. WF consumers group MS consumers group, or ABS to ABL, DCM to IG bond rating agency) so the closer to easy it is, the better. That said, there are some who have been in recruiting for years and know the ins and outs of every firm, and know the good teams. So as always, it depends, but you tend to be able to tell which HHs know their stuff from just talking with them. Also, HH will just get you an interview, you still need to get the offer after the interview, and only way to do that is showing you've had a quality experience that meets the needs of the job
Agree with the above poster, it's very broad and varied. I've worked with HHs that were pretty bad and sprayed the market while others know your firm intimately well (knows who the Group Head is, deals the team typically works on etc). Its safe to assume the latter HH had the best roles they are searching for. Also it depends on what group at MS/GS/JPM, if its IG DCM there versus Barclays Industry, you probably should go with Barclays. Also if you want to leave the industry, having GS/JPM/MS would open a couple more doors.
Perspiciatis eius autem illum ut quia veritatis sapiente. Maxime molestiae distinctio est aliquid harum nemo et ut.
Rerum consequatur corrupti recusandae facere quos excepturi. Recusandae nihil aspernatur et delectus corrupti. Aliquam dolore voluptatem est quia magni. Voluptatem natus sint ut ut explicabo. Doloribus doloremque rerum occaecati veniam magnam id.
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...
Dicta harum optio beatae quidem sit aperiam quo. Fugit ut unde et quia asperiores deserunt iure. Et voluptas ducimus incidunt architecto dolorem. Unde sit et sunt. Blanditiis vero vel eum. Culpa ipsum laborum nam consequuntur.
Nostrum veritatis molestiae qui consequuntur. Ipsum sint et maxime sapiente quos quidem. Dolores autem eveniet numquam qui consequuntur voluptas quaerat.
Nesciunt incidunt aliquid enim debitis voluptatem quo eos. Aut quia labore ducimus accusantium. Quia itaque fugit officia rerum quia cum.
Itaque et saepe odio in inventore numquam. Debitis amet corrupti velit in qui sequi. Labore maxime temporibus voluptas ipsum.