I Rejected GS/MS/JPM for DB *Non Troll Post*
Call me crazy, but the DB UK office is the bank of the future. Most of you won’t get it now, but you’ll come back to this post in a few years and see what I mean.
A few months ago, I turned down a full-time offer from GS/MS/JPM in a solid group (TMT/Industrials/M&A) to join DB. This isn’t a troll post, I genuinely believe in the direction the bank is heading within the UK.
It’s noticeable there’s a real push to support juniors, a transparent plan to grow the M&A practice, and a clear 10-year vision to become the top M&A bank in Europe.
For strong performers, the exit opportunities to MF’s are there, and the office boasts standout figures like Matthew Matthew and even recently poaching Luba kotzeva.
With significant senior hiring in Q1 and Q2 of 2024 the top heavy structure is starting to even out especially in prominent groups, the deals will follow.
This isn’t a “glaze DB” post; it’s a message for those chasing prestige to think about the bigger picture. Join a bank that aligns with your goals, has people you click with, and gives you the best opportunity to learn and grow during your time there.
Intresting take about chasing prestige and going with the right fit/ experience. One of my friends recently turned down SA positions at Evercore & Lazard (Uk offices) for DB (Uk office).
Anyone here will take DB over Laz if you’re goal is to have a decent exit lol.
That isn't particulalry shocking for the Lazard bit. Lazard as a whole is falling massively in the league tables and isn't investing as much into IB as DB. I think for a long-run career in banking, DB seems to be a place for you to potentially grow with more so than Lazard atm.
What does Laz have other than IB? Isn't it a boutique advisory firm?
Agreed, this applies for the whole of DB except Healthcare - it is a lost hope
What's wrong with their HC?
Everything - no good culture, consistent 4ams on pitches or financing deals - no M&A. Toxic seniors with only one decent director left after everyone quit a couple of years back. They fired a VP recently and VPs left are atrocious. You hit your ceiling there within a year and you cannot even lateral successfully (only a few have) because you have no deal experience apart from financings.
"this isn't a glaze DB post" ---> calls them the "bank of the future" ok buddy lmao just pack your bags and accept you made a bad decision. the first stage of grief is denial.
More glaze than a krispy kreme doughnut
This post was made by a DB Numis UK smallcap/mid market M&A intern
don't know what's more fucked up
> a 20 yo talking so confidently about a a bank's 10-year strategy
> taking DB over GS/JPM/MS by having in mind this 10-year strategy, when staying in an US BB could allow you to lateral directly at +1/+2 upper hierarchy on DB.
otherwise, I hope you're trolling because if you're not... you lost some career advancement and I even feel sorry about this
I may understand that "entrepreneurial" striving of being part in something that is being built, but at the junior level.... again, what the fuck hahah should have lateraled at AS level and carry that US BB brand with you on the shoulders to dominate during DB meetings
your post is giving me "I refused GS and I will join UniCredit because Orcel is building the future JPM of Europe" vibes
How would you rank a top MM (Jeff/HL) against DB/UBS?
IB Moelis > DB > UBS > HL
but that's just because I'm biased on it. I like MM because they are more entrereneurial and need to grind more for their mandates contrary to well established institutional banks + in Europe having a US brand name gives your background a special touch (don't ask me why, maybe they look for bankers who were influenced by the US culture carried from overseas into European offices).
on RX side can't rlly comment, would be temted to put HL first and keep the same order, but heard mixed views about their European practice
The post wasn’t about blindly rejecting GS/JPM/MS or pretending to have cracked a bank’s 10-year strategy as a junior. It’s about questioning the herd mentality where everyone assumes the GS -> MF PE -> SM HF pipeline is the only route to success.
Historically, some of the biggest names in private equity, Kravis, Schwarzman, Peterson took risks by stepping off the traditional paths when PE itself was a niche, high-risk career. At the time, leaving institutions like Bear Stearns and Lehman for something as unproven as LBOs seemed absurd. Yet, they saw an opportunity that was well researched and took it.
To your point about taking DB over GS/JPM/MS, yes, the brand value of a US BB is undeniable, especially early in your career. It can make lateral moves easier, carry weight in meetings, and open doors to future opportunities. But this post isn’t about trying to prove one bank’s “strategy” over another, it’s about bring awareness to why everyone defaults to these choices without considering less traditional better suited alternatives.
Does every junior joining GS or MS pause to research if their office even has a long-term plan for growth or junior progression? Or are they just joining because of the perceived prestige? And while “dominating DB meetings” with a GS/MS/JPM brand might be appealing, what about the opportunities to be part of something being built, where you can grow alongside the firm rather than just being a cog in the machine?
This isn’t to say my decision is revolutionary or without risks, but it’s worth considering that not every path needs to follow the same template. Some people prefer working at banks where senior leadership actually prioritises the region they’re working in (e.g., London for European banks) rather than being in an office where executives visit once every few years.
And no, this isn’t “I refused GS and I will join UniCredit because Orcel is building the JPM of Europe” vibes, it’s simply food for thought. Maybe it’s worth asking if the default paths people are chasing now are actually the best routes for everyone, or just the easiest NPC risk-adversed ones to follow.
your mindset is good, but not because of the decision you're sharing re. taking DB, but because you have a long-term approach to your career which means you planning to stick around finance long-term and you take decision based on this vs. those more lost (read: 2 year training ground / exits / discovering themselves while they get paid / prestige (duh), etc.).
So some encouragement: The fact that you're a long-term thinker you'll get far in this field, not necessarily because you picked DB > US BB, so chill, you'll do well no matter where you are. As a matter of fact, few have Milken/Dimon sort of ambitions in this field, the majority treat it as a simple job, so that's also some a sign of determination ;)
but understand that my take is fairly objective and more so when a 2 year analyst sting to then lateral, in a 30 years career, is almost nothing and has a certain compound element to it. But the offer was taken, so wish you all the best, because from another side, on a 30 year career, the brand is irrelevant, skills are what matter.
Lmao, this guy is comparing himself to Schwarzman, Kravis and Peterson. I guess his choice is starting to make more sense...
I moved to another European BB after many years at DB and regret it every single day. Worked at a few BBs in my career and culture was the best at DB. I’ve been trying to get back for a few months now as they’ve been ramping up recruitment. Good momentum for them I’d say.
Not to dismiss your point about DB potentially becoming a top bank in Europe over the next decade, but there is a different perspective here. This argument only holds weight if your goal is to stay in IB for the long term—though, in my opinion, 10 years is an extremely long horizon in high finance. The reality is that most people on this forum aim to exit IB within 2–3 years.
That’s why many gravitate toward GS/MS/JPM, as these firms consistently lead in buyside placement opportunities and carry significant prestige. Additionally, it’s worth noting that the top BBs in Europe boast strong pedigrees and are often viewed more favorably than many EBs that might outrank them in the U.S. context.
Once again, maybe true if IB is a long term thing but still not convincing enough if you're looking to exit in 2-3 years.
Look - it’s perfectly reasonable to choose DB over GS / MS (and a whole lot of other permutations va a clear hierarchy). The people who make money in banking or related industries are the ones who do well themselves independent of the institutions they work at, and people need to make decisions on where they will individually thrive and not brand name (of course if you don’t have a view on that brand helps).
But let’s not pretend anyone of us have a view as to where DB will be in 10 years. I think their management is doing a lot of the right things but their home market is going through a lot of pain and the people they are hiring are tier 2 or 3 talents vs tier 1 (see the hires Citi made for tier 1). I’m overall a fan of the place but there’s no crystal ball.
On that note, is Citi getting better since Viswas Raghavan?
Vis is terrible
So does prestige have any value?
Only insofar as you can monetize it.
MF looks are one means of monetization but less good than they used to be
The street is moving a lot further towards paying for individual achievement (thankfully in my view), and people need to be a lot more discerning about what they can achieve and where they can achieve it vs institutional prestige
inb4 2 months from now when this guy wants to move to the buyside and realises it doesn't fucking matter where DB will be in 10 years and he is getting significantly less looks from headhunters vs his friends at GS.
The people at the DB AC were the nicest interviewers I‘ve had in any interview I‘ve ever done.
Is there actually a guy named Matthew Matthew?
…
Industrials>TMT >>>>>> rest
…
Evth is decent but Healthcare is where you should not wander
When prospects come on to this forum to make these overly optimistic posts, often supporting them with unfounded or stupidly naive statements, I typically turn a blind eye.
However, this is where I have to stop you kid lmao. You see, those same aforementioned naive prospects, are pushing banks in the UK like PJT or Centerview Or an Ardea for example. Places which have had far more high-profile hires than you have mentioned and long-term plans for growth that seem feasible simply based on how efficiently these firms have operated post-GFC (Deutsche, on the other hand, has very little precedent for this....). Out of the BBs, the only bank which you could make a somewhat sound argument to choose over MS/GS/JPM would be BAML and even then, your argument has to be extremely optimistic or similar to some examples I discuss in my final paragraph. All the other BBs are quite frankly on a linear (albeit not alarmingly steep) descent - especially DB/Citi.
For reference, everything you mentioned here is 10x more true for the American EBs and even prospects aren't making claims as bold as 'Evercore has a clear 10-year vision to become the top M&A bank in Europe.'. Seriously, if those are the things you care about, why even go to DB, surely a PJT or something similar would be more suitable - especially since it's probably easier to exit from PJT than DB nowadays.
Had you just said, 'I Chose DB because I couldn't stand the majority of people I networked with at GS/MS/JPM and could not survive even 2 years with those character types' or 'I chose DB because I got a shitty group that does not align with my interests or long term goals at GS/MS/JPM' then that would have been a much more feasible take. Your reasoning is BS and you sound like an undergrad who likely did not even get the first rounds for GS/MS/JPM but wants to somehow manufacture a synthetic brand improvement in the place they are interning at so that when other grads shit talk DB you can refer them to this thread, using your vast Silver bananas (likely all from those with some relation to DB - because let's face it, the GS/MS/JPM guys would not care remotely enough to click on this thread) as a stamp of evidence. For those reading this, this is why you have to take everything with a pinch of salt. I have been guilty of doing something similar to this myself when I was much younger and an incoming summer intern at a European EB (I don't even work at a EB anymore), so I can tell when someone is trying to do the same thing. I am not proud of it, but I remember making a UK banking ranking that was sound overall, but I snuck in my Euro EB a good few places higher than it realistically should have been at the time lol.
P.S.: I highly doubt any bank with a solid (according to your claims, phenomenal in fact) long-term growth plan is having academia discuss how bad they are failing as recently as just 2 years ago - If this is the quality of DB juniors, it is evident why their HF exits are so (relatively) poor. Imagine your MM analyst reading management guidance and recommending a buy based almost entirely on that. "Paul Singer dude just trust me, the management vision is sooo good dude, this stock has a good vibe just buy it". : https://academic.oup.com/ser/article/20/4/2017/6661207 - (This was also probably written during the 2021 deal boom lmao)
1. touch some grass
2. plz fix executive director => prospect
thx
Miss out on the one period a year where i have the capacity to shit on DB? Absolutely not!
'DB not a BB day' should be an annual holiday for all :)
If you have honestly expressed why not GS/JP/MS TMT, e.g. brutal hours or you want to standout more in the crowd, these are good respectable arguments to make.
Believing in a 10 year vision? Not the first time that I heard top management tryna fool the incoming junior class about a bright future ahead.
Ita Vero!
lol the amount of 10 year plans I’ve seen over my career.
never underwrite to that.
Never fully understood why people are so obsessed with Mathew Mathew - they guy is half bald before 40. None of his juniors last longer than 2 years and many of his “clients” do not even show up for the meetings. The guys who got MF positions would have earned them working anywhere else within top10 so I would say they got them despite DB and not thanks to it. MM only strong point was a great relationship with Gavin Deane which seems to fade as MM got moved away from some flagship deals.
Great that you believed in their pitch - when I started my career in London, DB was in top 5/ 7 banks but then it was so badly managed, and continue being so, that I think it will stay outside top10 for many years to come.
Good luck also in being guided by mediocre people - JPM / MS / GS allure comes from the fact that you are surrounded by highly demanding and technically strong people. Having worked in a few banks, and being exposed to more I can easily say that DB is neither technically strong nor inspirational. Most MDs struggle to find mandates and many deals have 2:1 ratio of MD : Analysts - yes twice many MDs than analysts - imagine internal calls and mark-ups given everyone needs to show that they contribute. Also do check out what happened to their other visionary - Daniel Ross… if the father of DB Numis got ejected - do you think the deal is really making money to the bank?
As a current DB associate I can weigh in. Your thinking makes sense if you’re an upper mid level banker looking to build a new space for the bank and want the support and freedom and space. But that is rare to find even at a DB, and originating deals at DB is much harder than at other banks from what I can see. I’m in one of the weaker teams mentioned (HC/Consumer) so I see the challenges first hand. But we also have some guys who’ve become stars in their verticals and bring in a lot of revenue, like Onsorge, Benoit, Sweidan, Wagnert, Van Loon). Generally there are areas where competing in M&A can be more fair game if you have some track record and drive and can build strong client relationships over a number of years, but the bank is still trying hard to move away from its Lev Fin roots and establish in M&A so it’s an interesting experiment to watch.
out of curiosity what deals did Ohnsorge (or maybe actually Onsorge) generate in M&A in 2024, and Sweidan in 2021-2022? it feels like there are a lot of urban myths in DB ranks
Ah, yes, Wojciech Onsorge’s "illustrious" career in M&A is a fascinating tale!
In 2024, Onsorge’s most notable “deal” involved securing a strategic partnership between Warta Poznań's defence line and an emerging midfield talent – a clear example of vertical integration on the pitch. This came after years of “precedent transactions,” like his seamless transition from Elana Toruń to Polonia Środa Wielkopolska, demonstrating his ability to handle both II Liga and III Liga complexities with the precision of a seasoned investment banker.
Truly, the urban myths surrounding DB rank legends mirror Onsorge’s rise through Poland’s footballing tiers. Both are inspiring narratives of resilience, adaptability, and success, if occasionally exaggerated in the retelling.
Est a excepturi dolore labore quibusdam ipsum. Veniam voluptatem maxime dolor nam est natus id placeat. Non iure rem enim. Aut adipisci a sequi sed ut porro velit.
Tempore aperiam veritatis doloribus qui qui non. Voluptatibus ipsam dolor nulla voluptatum nihil molestiae nisi rerum. Dolorum ut maxime omnis error velit exercitationem sequi aut. Aliquid consequuntur velit perferendis sit.
Non architecto impedit amet consectetur dolor ut. Quas porro quo rerum ut. Amet sapiente in repudiandae sit odio mollitia.
Veritatis esse voluptas modi veniam. Doloribus fugit labore rem non eligendi vitae. Maiores non fugiat tempora officia dolores. Veritatis nihil aut nesciunt vel vel et.
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...
Consequuntur soluta sit quidem voluptas vel. Consequatur sint voluptatem harum tempore magnam sed. Et ea reprehenderit modi. Quaerat consectetur magni non molestiae sit.
Qui sint voluptatum deleniti est voluptas. Eos qui necessitatibus molestias qui modi dolor. In reprehenderit nihil beatae pariatur provident rem. Sunt itaque sequi est et dicta perspiciatis. Ea numquam totam corrupti.
Ipsa qui voluptas porro sed. Ut incidunt delectus molestiae hic qui velit. Eos molestias quis vel iusto quia eveniet. Aut qui tenetur suscipit ipsa expedita. Perferendis reprehenderit velit eos. Et aut dolorem autem molestiae.
Sint molestiae placeat quia laboriosam maxime. Id molestiae sed iste asperiores ea sed debitis explicabo. Iste sed porro repellat. Aut voluptas ducimus dolorum. Rerum explicabo qui ut aspernatur.