At the analyst level, what are the differences between getting placed into a top group vs a "bottom" group at GS/MS?
In terms of comp, exit opps, experience, etc. Are there some places that would only recruit at a top group and not the others, for example?
Also heard that there aren't really "bottom" groups at these 2
| +370 | Evercore Intern Seizure | 54 | 14h |
| +71 | JPM M&A is Gone??? Purely Coverage Banking??? | 31 | 13h |
| +62 | Is DCM actually underrated ? | 24 | 1d |
| +51 | How do I understand vs. just memorizing? | 8 | 4h |
| +48 | Losing my personality in Banking | 9 | 1d |
| +47 | Are all Tech / TMT groups sweaty? | 38 | 1d |
| +42 | Associate & Above IB exits | 16 | 4d |
| +33 | Incoming IB Analyst: Best Ways to Prepare? | 11 | 5h |
| +27 | Which groups are ideal for laterals? | 12 | 1d |
| +24 | Thoughts on PEI Global Partners? | 4 | 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.
I think group rankings within “top” banks is kind of ridiculous. The comp is the exact same for analysts. Deal flow is not related to how “good” the group is (RE might have great deal flow, but people consider it “bottom”). Exits are basically the same. I think people who are hell bent on MF PE tend to go to “top” groups, rather than “top” groups sending people to MFs. Being in a top group may put you in a marginally better spot, but the difference can easily be overcome by person in “worse” group putting in more effort. I worked at one of the two mentioned banks and can guarantee you that at least someone from every group went to a MF PE shop and the good majority of people who wanted to go to PE ended up at UMM firms, regardless of their group.