I was thinking if modeling would be more difficult or complex in certain sectors versus others. Ex: would tech be more on the easier side if companies are not profitable versus say oil and gas which has difficult metrics? If yes, would everyone want to join the easier-to-model groups?
| +327 | Return Rates For Interns Are Falling? | 136 | 38m |
| +146 | Article: Why UBS's Asian M&A bankers are thriving and UBS's American M&A bankers are not | 16 | 2h |
| +121 | I am a drunk MD AMA | 40 | 20h |
| +119 | Evercore > Goldman and I don’t think it’s particularly close anymore | 50 | 9h |
| +86 | UBS Offer Day | 30 | 9h |
| +64 | I hate Wells Fargo | 17 | 6h |
| +57 | An Outsider’s View of RX Banking Out of College | 6 | 6d |
| +51 | Santander IB? | 10 | 2d |
| +49 | No return offer - feeling like a failure is an understatement | 19 | 4h |
| +43 | WF Return offers | 28 | 1d |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
O&G is extremely complex modeling as you have to do both a financial/cash flow model and an asset model. Same thing for Infra, ridiculous granularity there. Banks also have weird reporting mechanisms and a ton of regulatory stuff you have to steer the boat around, so I'd throw that on the list too.
Outside of those asset-heavy areas I think the other groups are all roughly the same "difficulty" of modeling. Most models are roughly the same setup and just add in different industry metrics / line items as needed. It's not that difficult to learn to model and "easy" model groups aren't really a priority - there are some bank-specific groups that don't do fulsome modeling if you're really not interested in doing it (M&A holds pen at some banks; also DCM/ECM won't be doing a ton of modeling)
People tend to choose groups based on personal interest in an area and quality of exits.
On a renewables deal in China, I had to model out solar power returns generated based on every 30 minutes for 30 years, using 8 different variables (battery, panels, etc) with ~ 6 options for each.
Had to use some quality macros for that bad boy, and I’m pretty sure the Titanic moved faster than it.