JPM vs Greenhill vs Ducera
Interested in these 3 for their NY offices and want to go to the buy-side after my analyst stint; obviously JPM has top 3 BB prestige (not GS/MS tho) but has group placement risk and a lower return offer rate, Greenhill isn't what it once was but still has solid MM/UMM/MF PE exits, and Ducera pays its analysts $200k+ but has the worst hours and exits generally limited to credit roles. Thoughts?
Comments (38)
Do you have offers from all 3? I would choose JPM then tossup between GHL and Ducera depending on how much you like RX
Choose JPM, if you don't like it or don't get the return offer you would have J.P. Morgan on your CV. Killer.
.
Choose greenhill
Why?
not OP, but at least in the CHI office all greenhill analysts exit to MF/UMM, exits are still top
I think you idea that of Ducera exits being limited is partially due to selection bais. In order to have a shot with them you really need to be passionate about RX and I think that just leads to more moving to credit buyside. I know they had a couple people that exited to HIG and 1 to EQT in the last couple years, which isn't bad given class size. Anyways, if you just want to do M&A, I would say JPM > Greenhill >= Ducera(mix M&A and RX) not sure how much longer Greenhill over Ducera will last, since one is struggle and one is growing.
Ducera over Greenhill
Bump
bump
bump
Personally, I'd choose JP Morgan myself. The JP Morgan brand name is unmatched. Ducera and Greenhill are solid banks nonetheless.
JPM HR burner alert
Care to elaborate?
Gonna go contrarian and say Greenhill. Solid culture, stable buyside placements (better than JPM on an average outcome basis), higher pay than JPM. Would eliminate Ducera as it is too limiting.
Are these things still true? You can't even find Greenhill on league tables anymore while they used to be top 15 ten years ago.
Yes to pay and placements. League tables is not totally indicative of buyside interest. There is a lot of prestige/legacy/preference factor. There was another thread awhile ago that compiled buyside placement from BB's. Credit Suisse was the strongest out of mid-tier BB's even though their deal volume has fallen behind over the past few years.
What's your thoughts on them at the associate and VP levels?
If you let WSO convince you to take Greenhill over JPM, you shouldn't have a JPM offer. Can't think of a single buy-side firm that hires from Greenhill and not JPM or in preference to them, whereas in any exit outside finance, JPM >>>>> Greenhill.
Second GHL. While they've plummeted in league tables and have pretty dog M&A dealflow, they still place really well into buyside due to legacy prestige / recruiting inertia.
nah lol
How much of that buyside placement is rx vs m&a tho?
Doesn't JP have the same prestige factor as well? If M&A deal flow is dead doesn't that mean you're just pitching all the time and MDs are stressed struggling to bring in fees so they take it out on analysts?
JPM definitely has the same prestige factor and a much, much stronger brand globally, but for the purpose of OP's question we cannot ignore group placement risk. If M&A deal flow does indeed "die", how will the MD's react? And how will that affect the analyst experience? It's a hypothetical question that nobody really knows. It is a good thought to ponder on though.
Bump
JPM duh
Did anyone hear back from GHL super day yet?
Bro… jpm over both of those and its not even a question.
Hope this is a troll post. Take JPM and get off WSO.
JMP as long as you can get into a core group (M&A, HC, etc).
Ut iste quo debitis et quia. Aut accusantium vel ab nesciunt explicabo quasi sunt.
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 Want to Unlock by signing in with your social account?
Optio praesentium enim odio est. Illum quae qui doloremque occaecati.