Do you think investment banking is worth it if you don't plan on staying as in IB or going towards the buy side? I know from IB, many jump over to the corporate side like CorpDev or FP&A but, in the process, take a huge pay cut. Doesn't it seem better, in the long run, to join capital markets origination or a group of that level rather than IB, and then stay there and get internally promoted every two years. I'm assuming you'll make a lot more as a VP in capital markets origination, with a lot less risk, than FP&A at the same time in your career without sacrificing the 50-65 hour weeks.
Trending Content - Investment Banking Forum
Career Resources
Hey fsdfadasdf, I'm the WSO Monkey Bot and I am sad to say, but this thread is lonely, so thought I'd post in here to try and help out. Some potential topics that might help:
Fingers crossed that one of those helps you.
Curious about this as well
Friendly bump.
Bump
Anyone?
In my honest opinion, banking isn’t really worth it if you don’t want to stay in a deals-focused role. There are other options to FP&A roles (Big 4, for example) that don’t require the level of sacrifice that you put in as a banking analyst. You can even make it to Corp Dev from certain Big 4 roles, or industry FP&A teams - you don’t necessarily have to start in banking. (I’ve personally seen this)
Now if you’re unsure of want to you want to do, want high finance as an option, and don’t mind committing your entire life to work for a year or two, then go for it. You do learn a lot from banking, but there’s other options that still teach you a lot without the same level of sacrifice.
Capital markets is definitely riskier then Corp dev or FP&A (especially FP&A)
Why is that? Is it because they get axed during recessions?
Yes and higher variable (bonus) pay that depends on performance. Also higher expectations for performance before you’re squeezed out and you don’t develop a ton of skills you can leverage into a career elsewhere when that happens. You’re a one-trick pony.
It's well worth it for the simple reason that it is always WAY easier to go 'down' in job type than it is to go up.
For example you decide you want to do capital markets origination long term? Way easier to go from banking to that than it is to jump from internal FP&A, treasury or what have you
Want to go to PE/HF/Corp dev/AM/VC? All of those recruit from IB roles. Basically none recruit from FP&A and recruiting from capital markets is significantly more difficult vs. traditional coverage IB or M&A IB
So yes if you somehow have charted out your whole career and know you want to do FP&A forever than pick that (have almost never met someone who knew this out of school - and if they were that certain about something it was definitely NOT an FP&A or any BO/MO corporate type role). Want to have optionality? Pick IB
Quia minima sunt odit qui saepe omnis. Ut sed architecto qui fugit error sequi ipsam. Ab voluptatem similique eligendi. Molestias et fugit aut. Sed exercitationem ratione ea.
Quia nobis fugiat et architecto consequatur. Non commodi aliquid saepe voluptatem quasi porro. Temporibus similique sunt maxime quia possimus. Delectus est aspernatur ut inventore dolores consequuntur consequatur.
Quas quidem officiis autem dolores. Omnis ex voluptatem accusantium eos. Molestias veritatis occaecati quam commodi sed. Repudiandae dolorem quis animi et corporis aspernatur nulla. Est nisi tempore aut vel at. Consequuntur rerum omnis ea molestias sed consequatur.
Omnis cupiditate sint harum amet nihil dignissimos. Enim earum aliquam dolorem assumenda maiores.
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...