Can’t speak on the prestige side as much, but from an outsider’s perspective they are advising on large and mega deals, specifically within HC, tech, and industrials. Have heard that exits are solid as well


Definitely a step lower, I don’t even really consider them an EB tbh but maybe that’s an old position (MS me Gugg interns)


Interesting take. Why aren't they an EB? Is it because of their relatively big size? Judging by the quality of analysts/associates they have they aren't TOO different than some other EBs 


*Only comparing those students who want to do IB with the ultimate goal of PE/HF. Based off my experience (Wharton), the very top students, I mean geniuses, go straight to megafund analyst positions. Other top students (not very top) get scattered pretty evenly among the EBs (including Gugg) / BBs because the greater importance of diversity and recruiting from a wider variety of undergrad schools make it impossible to predict where someone will end up. Adding in nepotism, it's incorrect to say analysts at one EB/BB are generally better than analysts at another (even GS vs. CS). So to answer your question, yes definitely an EB with great exits

Most Helpful

I think people get so caught up with the idea of prestige and don't necessarily think about how those rankings are made. Guggenheim is a fantastic firm, everyone i talked to there loves their team and they advise on some of the coolest deals. If you consolidate the last two decades of deals, its just that places like Goldman, EvercoreCenterview, etc have won so many deals and mandates, and have a different amount of success when you think about it historically and the size/impact of the deals


That's the issue - I've heard Gugg used to pay close to top of the street but is now consistently paying lower than some of these other firms. A friend that works there said they wait to see what other boutiques pay and try to be middle of the pack afterward


We’re a reputable firm and I (personally) love my team and the deals we do together. All of the firms mentioned in this thread are great. I think it’s more important to find the industry / culture / geo fit you desire vs. think about squishy concepts like prestige. I don’t think it matters once you hit the desk - it’s about how you’re spending your life and your time, you know?


Also depends on the industry. Within Esoterics Structured FInance, they are by far # 1 in that space. They put together financing in sfg for first time asset classes, and for companies. They also know who the investors are, and how to convince them to buy. The modeling and skillset you will get from working here will set you up for life. But the hours are brutal. Can work 80-120 hour weeks when it gets busy, and you're working on challenging stuff. Bonuses are solid, and if you have to cancela  vacation for a deal, gugg will cover all expenses related to the cancellation.


Guggenheim analysts have completely taken over this thread as evidenced by how many SBs comments receive after just an hour. If I were a prospect I would not only tune out this glazing but also reject being with such insecure analysts who want their bank to so desperately be an EB (it is a MM).


It's good to know that the reason my VP is so unresponsive and takes so long to turn comments is because he/she's on WSO defining EBs and debating kids over which banks fit this made-up category


Gugg is a great firm - they do well and take a lot of intelligent hires

Generally good exit opps from what I've seen as well over the years


Disclaimer I work at Gugg. In terms of overall prestige, I think it’s a half step down from traditional “EBs” and a quarter step up from larger MMs (Jeff, Roths).

I define prestige as deal size, pay, exits.

Deal size wise, we are lower than the top players like CVP for sure, but (I could be wrong) I think it’s higher than Moelis (and others?) which are definitely considered EB on this site, but does mostly MM deals from my understanding. This was from dividing total deal volume / #, which isn’t perfect data.

Pay wise, we’ve certainly paid near the top end of the street. Generally in line with Lazard, PWP and Moelis the last few years, but lagging CVP, PJT and EVR. My bonus has been meaningfully higher than peers at Lazard and PWP, but friend at EVR had the same bonus but higher TC due to higher base. Pure anecdotal, so not sure where averages shake out.

Exits are weaker overall, but I would imagine that it’s because top talent goes to EBs rather than Guggenheim and it’s more candidate driven. Doesn’t seem like people have trouble getting looks, but placement is definitely not as strong.


Just to double check, you had the same bonus and rating as your peers? I would be surprised because I feel like LAZ pays a lower bonus vs Guggenheim and PWP pays a higher bonus than Guggenheim if you account for the same bucket rating.


To answer your question specifically, I was being conservative with "in-line" as I think it's been higher than both LAZ and PWP on average (less than 5 hard datapoints, so take with a grain of salt). Didn't want to jump to conclusions since my number was likely above average and other datapoints might have been mid bucket. 

From the WSO post, it sounds like PWP paid really well this year, but historically it seems like they haven't paid as well. 


This EB debate is pointless. Just as there are different tiers of BBs, there are different tiers of "EBs." For a bank that has advised on some of the largest transactions over the past decade (Disney / Verizon / Pfizer are top of mind) and for its founding to be tied to Bear Stern's advisory practice (Schwartz, Van Lith), Gugg can't be considered a MM bank. It's a lower tier EB behind the names mentioned above just like BofA / Barclays / CS / Citi / DB are a lower tier BB than GS / MS / JPM


Their MedTech team had some amazing runs in the late 2010s. Was probably the best boutique bank on the street that covered megadeals in the space and it was rumored that their comp was top of the street. I was hoping to get into a M7 - T15 (ended up at a T25) because I wanted to do banking at the time and Guggenheim stuck out to me as a place I'd want to apply to. Haven't spoken with any of their bankers though since my school's not a target. A lot of the bankers that I saw on LinkedIn pre-MBA also left for corporate exits or other banks by the time I was a first year. Seems like their MedTech team is small and has high attrition.


Always been a solid group. Good on pay, culture and exits


its one of gugg's stronger groups. interested in the office in menlo park - can anybody speak to their recent performance and how they're doing?


Corporis illum odit id iure officiis architecto ut est. Nulla aliquam animi cumque et vel perspiciatis qui dolor. Sint quia mollitia error. Optio laboriosam ea eum animi optio natus. Non nobis suscipit reprehenderit et voluptatem aperiam quo ipsa. Dolore quo deserunt voluptatem et aut ut.

Qui quod eos laborum ipsa. Sint et ipsa consectetur quam vero. Pariatur voluptate commodi illum eum velit dolorum praesentium earum. Exercitationem et officiis odit quasi veritatis distinctio quae. Culpa non vel in cumque aperiam et.

Et cum ut et qui optio architecto. Deleniti ratione aut vitae commodi voluptas culpa. Voluptas non laborum aliquam sit eos. Sunt amet quaerat commodi rem iusto autem. Itaque quasi ut tenetur necessitatibus natus aut. Eligendi quia qui doloremque. Quod hic quo magni velit mollitia.


Ipsam id dolorem et velit et nulla. Deleniti aliquam voluptatem est velit ea. Qui facere laborum minima corrupti vero assumenda.

Veritatis eos praesentium facilis magnam. Eum qui eos doloremque.

Deleniti consequuntur in qui itaque. Ad eaque enim consequatur doloremque.

Quae et earum consequuntur quae dolore temporibus eum. Asperiores soluta alias voluptas quis suscipit. Deleniti labore laboriosam quam nostrum expedita ut consequuntur. Molestias ea quos molestias. Illum reprehenderit in quos ducimus ipsum molestiae.