Highest Compensation for IB

they do sometimes. they do it b/c working at goldman/morgan can present many opportunities

base is standard across the board, bonus linked to how well you suck up to the staffer and also group's dealflow.

not afraid to give top bonus to the entire class. Blackstone also pays above street. I hear Goldman pays above avg base but bonus dispersion is wide. Stars get paid well, middle / lower analysts get paid below street.

"base is standard across the board, bonus linked to how well you suck up to the staffer and also group's dealflow."

thank you, kind sir, for bestowing upon us this abundant cornucopia of knowledge.

however, i should note that the original poster was indeed looking for "WHICH IB PAYS THE MOST FOR AN ANALYST." there are variations in base pay across wall st.

boutiques can pay a significant more than BB, especially if you are a qualified candidate in the hiring process.

had a friend who negotiated up to 70k+15k last year.

Hell, my friend got 80k+15k two years ago from Stephens, a small I-Bank in the Southwest(based in Little Rock, AR, but works in Dallas).

if qualified of BB, one would be ill-advised to go botique for more pay. incredibly stupid idea. i should note that Lazard is not a boutique. It is advisory and on par with Goldman/Morgan/ML/Citi/...

I'm in the market for a new gig. That was my sales pitch...so if there are any jeffco bankers out there hit me up.

jeffries sucks a nut

You have to respect them for being aggresive. They are the "underdogs."

Lesson #1 for you first year chimps out there...Don't ever discount the drive and ambition of an underdog...especially in this business. You have respect their desire...if you don't you are setting yourself up to get fucked in the ass.

The bulge banker who is fat, rich, and takes comfort in the name on his business card...you rarely have to worry about that guy.

good point

I would have to think real hard before working at Jefco IB.

It's one 'f' by the way...

"You have to respect them for being aggresive. They are the "underdogs." "

Every bank is aggressive when it comes to generating revenue.

"Underdog"= shitty league table numbers.

the people here are relentless

its true and you know it.

underdogs in banking have a harder time succeeding than in most other industries.

Mike - I would disagree. Its the difference between walking into a pitch and living off the brand name or actually having some good ideas. Although I agree you don't need to be an underdog to be agressive, they're normally hungrier. If you guys make it into your dream BB and work with a few seniors who have that hunger then you'd do well do align yourselves with them early on as they are your true rock stars. Someone who doesn't need the brand name to impress is a legend

Jefferies is an amalgamation of several shops. Parts of the equity research are top notch. As far as the IB is concerned, they are a top 3 MM firm. On a ROE basis they compare very favorably with all the ibanks, especially considering though don't make huge prop bets.

Everyone should also consider that the investment banks at all the BBs are in decline with respect to influence. GS is run by traders now, for example.

Typically the crappier banks win mandates by fighting harder for their clients. Although GS hands me some stinkers every once in awhile, they generally hand me deals that are much more favorable to the investor than a crappier bank would.

I don't work at an "underdog" so I can't imagine what goes on in their pitches, but I can tell you that bankers from my BB do not live off the brand name. We do not fill up slides with our top-notch league-table numbers. We generate ideas that bring value to the client and in the end, we usually end up getting the business (more often than said "underdogs").

What people fail to realize is that banking is a cutthroat industry from the analyst level all the way up to the MD level. An MD is only as good as the revenue he/she generates, so its unfair to say that an MD is "hungrier" at an underdog bank than at a BB.

Mike: just to be clear, I wasn't suggesting you were at an "underdog", my "you" there was to the wannabes.

And I guess I've just seen too many cruisers in my years for my liking - no disrespect to your shop.

We still friends?!

Livingthedream: I didn't take your post to imply that I was at an "underdog"; I fully understood what you were saying.

I'm lucky to say that all the MD's I've ever worked with have never cruised through pitches/meetings and hoped to get business just with the banks' brand name.

My original point, which I am sticking with, was a reply to the statement:

"Don't ever discount the drive and ambition of an underdog...especially in this business."

This business is much harsher for underdogs than other industries.

Goldman actually underpays...I hear Lazard, Blackstone pay you a bit more than street...but buyer beware because those banks will work you to the ground. Especially Lazard.

I think I read someplace that Houlihan Lokey pays above street. Like vault.com or something.