Is there a tangible difference in compensation between the post-MBA-->Associate and the direct Analyst-->Associate route?
Assuming one decides to forego the MBA and just stay an extra year to get promoted from Analyst to Associate, is the compensation you get as an Associate much lower than as an MBA hire?
I've tried the search, but couldn't really find anything specific to this topic.
There is zero difference in comp outside of bonuses, which has nothing to do with MBA or not. Once you start Associate training you are all considered equally, and the analyst promotes are generally thought of more highly by the groups because they have 3 years of seasoning and relationships in the bank with none of the arrogance of the MBAs.
Agree with TechBanking. I would be surprised if an MBA Associate gets a higher bonus solely because of their MBA. I would also add that an Associate should be able to execute everything an Analyst does in a timely manner. An MBA Associate in their first year can't do that in my experience. As an Analyst, working with an MBA Associate with no banking experience is a bit painful as they try to reinvent the wheel and add value which only results in more hours.
Again it is difficult to generalise but this is my experience.
Aliquid corporis quos non aut. Harum repellat omnis iste fugiat atque voluptatem. Et sed et cumque est sed.
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...