Incoming Intern: What is the worse UBS Group?
Hi all got an offer to join as an intern and ahead of placement, want to make sure I avoid the worse group.
Trending Content - Investment Banking Forum
| +222 | Downfall of Qatalyst | 42 | 11h |
| +168 | UBS IB 26Q2 a Disaster! Advisory Revenue Down 23%, Capital MarketsDown 5% | 22 | 3d |
| +111 | UBS Americas IB: The Kids’ Table of Wall Street | 15 | 16h |
| +81 | Lincoln International Return Offers | 42 | 1d |
| +52 | so confused about 28 SA timeline | 27 | 6d |
| +51 | London IB BB is a challenge | 31 | 4h |
| +37 | Fired during interview | 6 | 20h |
| +37 | momentum of Rx groups | 11 | 1d |
| +33 | [WSO MODS] Please Delete This BS Host Books Spam! | 2 | 5d |
| +29 | VP Lifestyle at Top BB Coverage Groups | 14 | 41m |
Career Resources
Tough call unless you work there
Helpful thanks
Looks still accurate
bump
Office?
E. All of the above
The people seem to agree
This is also an inverse what is the best group
Wish there was a way for us to see results without voting. I have no clue but would love to know if Im ever in this situation.
Just log out of your account and you can see the results
Anyone voting for one of Sponsors or LevFin is literally trolling. GIG as well tbh, the top 4 of the bank are pretty clear: Sponsors/LevFin followed by GIG and FIG (the only two industry group that actually get on billion+ EV deals at times).
Would you say Tech is clearly the worst which should be avoided?
100%
the junior experience is terrible because MDs are below average and struggle to bring in deals, you become a pitch b****
Wait why is M&A bad at UBS? I thought M&A is the go-to group at every bank because you get access to M&A deals of all groups?
As long as coverage feeds them enough deals which they haven’t been doing
So what do M&A bankers do all day?
Pray for lower interest rates
Team has a bunch of weirdos on it. From md to analyst.
To have a legit m&a team you need largecap public deal flow which ubs has none. They mostly help sector teams run sub 750mm processes which is sort of pathetic. Group probably doesn't even need to exist..barely anyone in that group has true public m&a experience.
Ok Barclays hardo. I know it’s hard to understand an M&A group in your fixed Barclays structure mindset but they do exist across the street. They are value add if coverage does their job generating deal leads.
The fact that they work with everyone and currently only have 6 votes means they’re not that bad
What makes these folks weirdos?
@Associate 3 in IB - Gen
Actually its Tech that barely needs to exist in its current size. Can probably be 1/3 the size and generate just as much revenue
Yeah tech has no one notable or respected across the industry
This is shocking as usually its hard to tell which is the worst at a bank between a couple groups. In this case its pretty clear Tech is a dumpster fire
Agree.
I have heard disgusting stories about the culture of UBS from friends formerly in the group…you can even look it up on other threads here if you don’t believe me. History of behaviors from their seniors against juniors / women not to mention all the politics. Maybe it has gotten better but I personally doubt it.
Is it just 1 bad apple or a cultural thing?
True, I heard the old staffer moved on to a better bank. It’s just a shame ubs has pretty much disappeared from that team.
Credit Suisse
What is the general sentiment around consumer? Looks like they have a few votes too
They have one REALLY strong MD in Lev Fin who came over from CS. It's historically a weak group for UBS and tbf all the other MDs don't really bring in deals. However, the MD is genuinely great and it seems like some other MDs are fine enough in my limited interactions with them as someone working in a product group). Overall, not that great of a group but MD by himself brings in more money and is better than all of the Tech/M&T/RELL (my opinion the three worst groups in no particular order) MDs so Idt consumer should be the worst. Everything outside of GIG and FIG within the coverage universe is just varying levels of bad with CR/HC being roughly similar IMO overall (despite HC getting a decent bit of new hiring and more aggressiveness, it's just not that good as of right now).
Isn't consumer?
The good teams in London are: FIG/GIG/LevFin/TMT (only telecoms)/RELL (doing very well this year)
Would avoid healthcare works similar hours to FIG, but with a fraction of the revenue
Tech also weak
Consumer is on the weaker side but still does stuff
Can TMT in London ship some Tech deals over to NY?
-Very Sad and Bored Tech Banker
Can’t recall any sizeable deal the tech team has done since I joined… Tech is just as dead as in the states, at least the telecoms team is preventing the team to be completely dead.
Agree, tech at least 3 years away from being good again
End-of-Year Performance Review for UBS Tech Group
The UBS Tech group has faced significant challenges this year, with a noticeable slowing of deal flow and overall performance. The group’s output has lagged behind expectations, with a limited number of transactions successfully closed. This lack of activity has impacted revenue and raised concerns regarding the team’s effectiveness and ability to drive results in a competitive market. Additionally, feedback and WSO posts have raised concerns around behavior that does not always reflect the exemplary conduct expected at UBS. Compared to its peer groups, the group needs more focus adhering to UBS’s standards of respect and collaboration with the group having the perception of sometimes falling short of the firm’s values.
Consequently, the UBS Tech group is rated as “Needs Focus” for both performance and behavior, with improvements needed in deal execution, client engagement, and adherence to UBS’s professional conduct standards.
Based on voting and comments it looks like these are the three tiers which seems accurate…
Exceeds Expectations: Lev Fin, Sponsors, GIG, FIG
Meets Expectations: Consumer, M&T, M&A, ECM, Real Estate
Needs Focus: Healthcare, Tech, PFM
ECM is still doing well in the grand scheme of things. They have improved from last year relative to overall market growth (I..e growth in the division relative to market), which is of course not the ultimate goal given they really want to grow the firm's banking division but it is unfair to group them with groups like M&T or M&A that haven't grown compared to last year. More accurate is: LevFin/Sponsors/GIG/FIG/ECM are all better than the previous year and the rest all are worse(I.e needs focus). Everything is relative and really should be compared to the year (though a little unfair to UBS since a lot of 2024 mandates are things won in 2023 when nobody in the right mind would give a mandate to a bank currently going through a merger, but it's also the marker of getting future deals as deals beget deals so to be conservative we should still hold the bank to that standard). Of note, GIG technically is basically the same as last year in terms of total EV but then again they have won more marquee deals this year but less smaller sized deals which I think is still a good sign + somewhat forgivable given the context. Idt it's particular relevant to worry about UBS's ability to win sub-1Bn deals, but more so the larger deals which GIG this year has markedly improved on, so I am comfortable giving them a meets or beats expectations rating. The other groups simply have just outperformed the previous year relative to overall market group.
When did you get the offer? Can I DM you op
Tech might be one of the “worst” because of deal flow, but isn’t actually bad in terms of culture / wlb
Culture of geeky snarky losers and all getting cranked on thicck (2 c’s) marketing materials, and pitches with a near zero percent chance of winning
We did it! Tech finally won something meaningful! We won the poll!
Don't mean to hijack this thread, but how many people did UBS take for SA 2025?
I hear their SA program is like summer camp, but instead of s’mores, you get stale coffee and passive-aggressive emails. The arts and crafts are just poorly aligned PowerPoint slides, the counselors are MDs who can’t remember your name, and the campfire chats are just awkward silences when someone asks, ‘So… any live deals?’”
The "worse" group??
Work at UBS. Would say:
Top tier: Lev Fin, GIG
If you can’t get in either: FIG
Mid tier: M&A, Consumer
If above fails: ECM, PFM
Would start recruiting somewhere else for full time: Tech, Healthcare
I think FIG should be in the top tier, it' 's one of two coverage groups that bring in any deal flows and although not everyone wants to do FIG PE or FIG-related work, relative to the firm FIG presents you with great exit opportunities(just like all non-GS FIG groups it is of course pretty restricted to FIG related work). LevFin is also a genuinely good group in terms of actually getting deal flow and having good senior leadership, even if I have heard that LevFin seniors work the juniors to death. LevFin however suffers from the same exact issue where exits are great if you want to do Private Credit but not that great if you don't.
Also, I don't understand why Sponsors isn't anywhere on here, it should prob be top tier if you think LevFin is given it just recently split and is the more coverage-y version of the previously combined group so those juniors might end up doing better for PE exits than the credit heavy LevFin team.
FIG is a bit stuffy culture wise which drops them a little.
Lev Fin is top tier at UBS and also burns people out. Agree nothing but respect for the seniors over there, they’re great. Lev Fin template and process gets monotonous though.
“Sponsors is top tier” is often said, but what do they actually do day to day besides take credit if a sponsor is involved? Marketing assets punted to sector coverage and process work punted to product teams. Seems like they kind of just are around to take credit 🤔
Advice for all external parties reading this thread: take everything that is being said here with a pinch of salt. UBS has gone through a massive change in the last year, and acquisitions take time to bear results. It seems that people who have been wronged in the process are here throwing their hate, but reality is that UBS is one of the few banks that has grown in the past years. Whenever the market recovers (it seems to be getting nearer) and the integration is fully behind, I think we can expect UBS to come back at a very good spot in the league tables.
UBS Drone: Ignore league tables, culture and everything else
UBS Drone Source: Trust me bro
Reality:
Americas now #15 and down 14% this year (3Q-24). The only bank in the top 20 this year with less fees this year than last year. Most market share loss YOY (0.7%) Culture also now ruined)
UBS's overall M&A is down, but the entire bank isn't doing terribly. Both Industrials and FIG have had pretty big mandate win and the deal closes with Industrials I believe having like 5 deals above 5Bn this year (including the biggest industrials deal in Home Depot - SRS as well as the largest packaging in Berry - Amcor and Chemicals in RIo Tinto - Arcadium deals of the year). Fintech and Asset Management also have seen pretty good success in the MM space (500MM - 1Bn) with a couple of scattering of 1Bn - 5Bn range. The main problem with UBS is that no other coverage group brings in ANY fees that aren't sponsor-related.
If you are in FIG, GIG, LevFin, or Sponsors you will most likely exit UBS with deal experience and deals to talk about. Heck, a lot of the interns this year in those groups closed deals. UBS just has an absurdly wide gap between groups where some are good-ish and the rest are hot-ass with some pockets of good MDs (who are on huge guaranteed bonuses).
Well, I can understand that – I feel I was wronged in my own little way too
How were you wronged?
In terms of coverage groups, here's how I'd think about it:
Tech is the worst of all worlds: terrible culture and no deal flow, so that has to be the answer. Sure other groups like Consumer have meh deal flow, but by all accounts from everyone I spoke to there the hours is pretty cushy and culture is great. Heard similar for M&T(got more of the chiller people from the combined TMT group from what I heard). HC I have heard mixed opinions on, but I doubt it's as much of a dumpster fire as Tech given that I still know a few juniors who like the group.
I think GIG, FIG, LevFin, and Sponsors are out of consideration by virutre of them providing their juniors with deal experience (though this can vary wildly: some GIG people and FIG people are stuck doing 300MM EV Lead Left and another could be doing a multi-billion M&A. LevFin staffs you by industry, so some get more experience than others but the UBS LevFin franchise has done good at generating lead lefts even if the coverage bankers are trash in their industry. Sponsors have the widest disparity with some juniors being on seemingly like 10+ deals and others being on like 0 or 1, but everyone gets some deal flow since the staffing model is that you cover a certain number of core and non-core sponsors).
I hope that was fairly comprehensive and helpful for an incoming intern. A lot of very (rightfully so) opinated juniors at UBS, so understand it might be rough to go through the comments; so wanted to share my views as someone slightly more objective in that I am no longer at the firm and left recently.
Yeah I should leave tech
TLDR; not good
Any more insight?
Best: LevFin, Sponsors
Rest are Mid
How is sponsors good?
That's not correct. GIG is a top group and probably stronger than sponsors in terms of analyst experience.
GIG has been by far the largest sector for deal activity at UBS with genuine large cap deals in both M&A and LevFin, FIG is a pretty distant second in terms of year-end deal flow through FIG was very close to GIG for 1H. The paper and packaging and chemicals subverticals are particularly strong and are on a lot of the large-cap deals in the space, can't say the same about any other sub-verticals at UBS and it's not like the other sub-verticals in the broad GIG group are terrible either.
Sponsors are just a glorified relationships group. LevFin does all the modeling and all the analysis, sponsors mostly just connect the sponsor to the bank and maintain the relationship. Yes, sponsors in terms of overall deal flow are the best coverage group but that's a bit of a case of UBS being a sponsors-driven bank and sponsors get credit for a deal even the main relationship is the industry guys as long as it involves a sponsor in the deal; doesn't make sponsors a good group for analysts just a good place to be a senior (we have very strong senior sponsor bankers, but they are largely the relationship people with the sponsors in question, which doesn't lead itself to the greatest analyst experience).
I don't understand why everyone just circle jerks on old opinions and doesn't actually check where UBS deal flow is or get a sense of how UBS groups function internally before commenting. If you talk to anyone at UBS, you'd easily see that LevFin won the split in terms of analyst experience since they do all the modeling, syndication, and more deal-oriented work. Sponsors is just the glorified relationships group, great place to be a senior but not exactly very technical.
FIG is the worst, they will try to convince you otherwise in placement because it's no one's real first choice
At least FIG has deals, can’t say the same for others
Bump
Pretty accurate, crowdsourcing works
Quae amet et adipisci dolores aspernatur nam. Beatae possimus impedit harum quod voluptatem sunt non. Quibusdam ipsa quo ducimus repellat provident quidem amet. Aut numquam minima autem nulla eligendi velit. Dolor officiis culpa veritatis ad doloremque blanditiis. Sit iste corporis saepe est reprehenderit. Sed qui nemo possimus reiciendis ea.
Rerum delectus veniam modi est et. Non est repudiandae similique quae. Illum rerum voluptatem eligendi nesciunt fugiat voluptatem non. Laboriosam et earum ab et. Eaque et laudantium eaque. Voluptas inventore accusantium id natus 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...
Voluptatem modi repellendus sed quae voluptas est quisquam asperiores. Iure natus est minus est.
Pariatur pariatur sed aut nihil ratione excepturi officiis. Soluta eos quidem modi optio ab consequatur explicabo.
Consequuntur iure et ea a sit sit velit. Molestiae aut pariatur voluptas sunt. Est odio voluptatum error.
Ex quis magni maxime amet assumenda qui eum et. Quia ab dolorem quod debitis. Temporibus nihil voluptatem voluptatem dolore iure. Quia delectus laborum beatae nostrum ut molestiae et.
Aut tenetur labore est consequatur. Sapiente dolores adipisci ullam eos. Expedita nulla dolor tempora necessitatibus ad voluptatem inventore. Repudiandae ea esse ea qui magni voluptates. Tenetur ea molestiae vero sapiente. Et assumenda voluptates consequuntur facilis omnis dolorem impedit.
Consequatur et quidem in totam quos aut. Odio ducimus odit iure reprehenderit ut qui rerum. Odio omnis et ipsam error eligendi est minus. Reprehenderit mollitia eius impedit totam eligendi.
Porro perspiciatis neque nemo sunt magnam tempora qui. Sed porro repudiandae ex voluptatem ut qui eos totam. Illo quis facilis quia sint. Accusantium esse molestiae eligendi aspernatur. Et aut et deserunt amet. Saepe praesentium mollitia asperiores neque quod incidunt quibusdam.