Is breaking into IB actually about skill — or just signaling + timing?
Hi everyone,
I’ve been trying to understand what really drives success in breaking into investment banking, and I keep noticing a pattern that doesn’t fully add up.
On paper, the focus is on:
•Technical skills (accounting, valuation, modeling)
•Strong work ethic
•Attention to detail
But in reality, it seems like outcomes are heavily influenced by:
•School / brand name
•Who you know (networking)
•Timing in the hiring cycle
Which makes me question —
1)At the entry level, how much do technical skills actually differentiate candidates vs pure signaling (brand name, internships, referrals)?
2) Is networking essentially a workaround for lack of pedigree, or is it the primary game regardless of background?
- For someone starting from a non-target, what has the highest ROI:
•Deep technical prep
•Aggressive networking
•Content / visibility (posting insights, deal breakdowns, etc.)
Not trying to downplay the effort required — just trying to understand what truly moves the needle vs what’s “expected.”
Would appreciate honest perspectives, especially from analysts / associates who’ve been through the process.
depends on your skillset. there are people who are extremely charismatic that, if they just network enough, will get a job. there are some people that are extremely boring, but insanely technically sharp, and so they get jobs too. there's no one size fits all approach. that being said, it's definitely a better use of time to network vs grind techs.
That’s interesting — feels like you’re saying there are multiple winning profiles, but networking still has higher ROI at the margin.
Curious though — do you think that holds even in more competitive cycles?
I’d assume when hiring tightens, firms might lean more on technicals just to filter candidates faster, whereas in hotter markets networking might carry more weight.
Or is networking basically the constant, and technicals are just the baseline you’re expected to clear?
networking is 10000x more important. you can't showcase your technical ability if you don't make it to the interview. someone on the inside really pulling for you and vouching for you will hold so much more weight than you being insanely cracked at technicals. i was always told techs are just a check the box and are not really a way to differentiate yourself.
that being said, you need to still be competent and be solid at techs when you do make it to the interview.
As others said techinical skills are important for breaking into any job, but being interesting and engaging to be around is important as well. Especially if everyone in IB interviews already has good technicals then it will most likely come down to who's the most interesting and entertaining to be around.
Explicabo quae et sapiente nihil aliquid consequatur sit facere. Dolorem est sed qui velit voluptas sapiente quae.
Nemo sunt voluptas dignissimos a quod sunt delectus. Minus aperiam quasi ducimus neque incidunt minima sed. Debitis quisquam rerum voluptatibus soluta dignissimos earum.
Quia aut sequi aut assumenda et dolores veritatis. Delectus et reiciendis tempore non. Rerum ipsa vel nemo eum soluta quo. Voluptas dolores explicabo vel magnam numquam. Velit et omnis fugit provident id in laboriosam.
Cumque at dolor rerum. Optio velit officia rem sint aliquam nihil qui. In sed et odit soluta qui ut. Quisquam voluptas corrupti officiis expedita ipsum quae aut assumenda. Ratione modi iste tenetur at perferendis aut sapiente natus.
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...