IBD at mid tier bank vs BO at BB

if it’s risk at GS, i would network around and see how easy it is to switch from that group to another coverage/product, ik for a back internal switch at GS is definitely easier and GS imo stands out that even associate and higher level have great lateral opportunities and doesn’t have to funnel into an MD

if MS, less certain

If you want to do IB, do IB.

Stupid fucking question that makes me wonder how you got an offer. Obviously IB, wtf?

Risk is really the way to go here. Will probably get a lot of pushback, but I work in PE and would much rather hire someone from GS risk than WF IB, and I think everyone in my team would agree. You learn on the job anyway, so the IB experience is pretty meaningless. The brand name trumps all in this case I think. Id take GS risk and run. Opportunities like that are few. Congrats

wat

dude take the IB offer hands down, you’ll get plenty of headhunters for PE from those banks, whereas you’d have to make a BIG gamble on lateraling from the other role when laterals from the “low tier” bank would have a big leg up on you…

congrats on Wells Fargo. They are nowhere near RBC in terms of M&A deal-flow. RBC > GS IBD for deal-flow and MF PE exits.

IB hands down

Risk -> IB is almost impossible

Risk? It's not even close. You listed two decent IBs. IB is the path to PE, if that's what you want. 

I left GS from a trading role to move to IB. The partner on my desk said if I didn't leave he'd get me into IB there, but there were so many variables I just stuck with my role at the BB that already offered me. He said he'd wished I came to him earlier...we had a good relationship. I just couldn't see the mechanics of how it would even happen or the related HR nonsense. He was sad to see me go and took me to an epic dinner on my way out. I started there in Ops and got a trading seat so I get some aspects of mobility, but S&T and IB (let alone risk) don't really cross over, even at the partner level at GS. 

Mid Off vs Mid Office

I'd like to think RBC IBD would place well  into PE?

Lmfao obviously IB if you wanna be in IB and do PE. You can lateral from capital markets and shit but no one's coming over from risk.

To address people saying you can "move around":

• MS - it is strongly discouraged to let risk move into FO roles because they want to keep both lines of businesses separate, especially for regulators. Many MS people have confirmed this point with me so I can tell you without a doubt this will be an impossible task.
• GS - People have fragile egos in this place, and even breathing the word FO might result in a low rating in a peer review and then getting fired. 

Now you mention IBD at WF, RBC. Honestly, your banking experience depends on how good your group is, not how prestigious the bank is. WF has a kick ass ABS business (they work on top tier mandates), and you will get top of the line expertise. My point is, do some research on the team you are joining before you discount it. Regardless, IBD > non-IBD. If you are competent, after 1-2 years you should be able to easily switch to another bank. It happens all the time. Why is this easy? One reason is because people won't be willing to switch from JP > MS because hours are tough, and if someone is looking to leave, they will leave banking, which creates spots when there is turnover. 

Start in IB. It would be so much easier to lateral or do other things starting in a front office role

Dude, reread what you just wrote. You want to get to the buyside, you recognize that an IB stint is usually what comes first. You have an IB offer and you're considering a risk management one?? You can't let prestige fuck your reasoning skills.

This post should be an auto revoke of your IB offer