Guggenheim vs Mid-BB vs MM
Have SPDs/offers at each. Mid-BB thinking Citi/Barclays. Wondering if Gugg has been working on more interesting deals but enjoyed the chats I had there. Looking for PE/HF exits post 2 years.
Trending Content - Investment Banking Forum
Career Resources
Based on the most helpful WSO content, here's what you need to know:
Guggenheim is a solid platform, but its deal flow and exit opportunities are heavily group-dependent. While they have been growing their practice and bringing in senior MDs, their exits to mega-fund (MF) private equity (PE) or hedge funds (HF) have historically been weaker compared to mid-tier bulge brackets (BBs) like Citi or Barclays. However, some top analysts at Guggenheim have managed strong exits, but it often requires extra effort and networking.
Mid-BBs like Citi and Barclays generally offer more consistent deal flow, better-established platforms, and stronger exits to upper-middle-market (UMM) or mega-fund PE firms. They also tend to have a broader range of opportunities across different groups, which can be advantageous for your career trajectory.
If you're prioritizing PE/HF exits, the mid-BBs might provide a more reliable path. Guggenheim could be a good choice if you’re in a strong group with good deal flow and are willing to hustle for exits. Ultimately, your decision should also factor in the culture and fit you experienced during your chats, as that can significantly impact your experience over the next two years.
Sources: https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forum/investment-banking/eb-vs-bb-long-term-and-exits?customgpt=1, Guggenheim Partners Investment Banking, Goldman Sachs MBD vs. SSG vs. MSI, Honest thoughts on Guggenheim, why are there so many guggenheim shills on this forum?
I would take Gugg just for higher comp while having similar deal flow and exits. Even better if u decide to end up staying for A2A comp wise. Obv other factors to consider but that’s my view
gugg cash bonus and culture seems nice, rep is also okay so i would pick it.
bump
If you are optimizing for exits, it's a push for all three banks you mentioned tbh. Dealflow is also a push tbh. I'll give my pros and cons for each of the three fwiw.
Gugg: Pros are best comp, solid culture, solid rep, solid exits (overall well-rounded). Cons are some headhunters view the banks as not-quite-an-EB like EVR/MOE/LAZ etc, not a BB, so stuck in a weird alpha MM spot (this is per a friend at the bank). Not an end all be all by any means - Gugg exits well!
Barc/Citi: Pros would be that the top groups have arguably higher-ceiling exits. Pu&i, sponsors, tech, hc for Barclays. Industrials, M&A, and sponsors for Citi. Barclays also gets the added benefit of having modeling done in-house, which is looked upon favorably for PE in particular (you could also just be in M&A at Citi). Cons are low pay and group placement process so you're rolling the dice to get into the best group possible. Also those aforementioned top groups have worse hours
I struggled even writing this. You can't go wrong with any bank...very similar exits. Barclays and Citi are better brands if you ever want to do something beyond IB/PE/HF like CorpDev or Startups. Gugg is better hours wise and pay wise if you value lifestyle (who doesn't...)
What makes you say Gugg has better hours?
Ignore the title, am an associate at a PE firm that just left a mid-tier BB.
Depends solely on how much you trust yourself in the group placement process and how risk-averse you are. Top groups at Citi and Barclays both exit better than Gugg, which for better or worse isn't considered in the BB/EB tier by some headhunters. On the flip side, you can get screwed in group placement and end up in ECM/DCM or a weaker coverage group to whereas Gugg will exit better.
Also would keep in mind that EB's generally attract those more interested in exits, so exits might not be fully reflective of differences in opportunities. I would wager that EB kids convert better on-cycle as they on average come in more prepared and ready for PE recruiting. The top groups at at a mid-tier BB pretty much make you competitive for all but a very select few PE/HF opportunities and you should have chances both in off-cycle and on-cycle which is about as good as you can ask for.
Why do you say top groups at mid-BB exit better? Are candidates generally more prepared or do they have more doors open for them?
Going to join a top group at one of such BBs so any color would be helpful
Nihil illo quidem est enim ut dignissimos eum. Ut unde ab deserunt labore asperiores.
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...