I think we can all agree, besides HF and Quant - Investment Banking is the hardest to break into.
But what's the most difficult section of investment banking to break into? Factoring in average class size, upward trajectory of comp, general demand I think we see :
(Highest to Lowest Entry Difficulty)
1) MF PE
2) West Coast Technology Banking
3) NYC Restructuring
4) NYC M&A Generalist
5) Chicago IB
6) Energy Banking in Texas
6) All else
ofcourse goldman is goldman and evercore is evercore. Can't compare Evercore Rx to a no name technology bank. But this is a generalized / AVERAGED difficulty ranking.
- inclusive of both analyst + MBA recruiting scene
Let me know yalls thoughts!
Would really help people hedge their bets accordingly during job applications.
NYC restructuring is 2nd most difficult?
That would be a stretch.
How would you rank them?
Yes? Far less spots compared to M&A and need to know normal M&A technicals + Rx technicals as well + interviews in general are far more technical than average BB interview
I'd say that for MBA recruiting, the process is less meritocratic compared to analyst recruiting. You will definitely come across some very mediocre candidates ending up in places that are considered top and vice versa, simply because how their recruiting process is built.
To your question, it really depends on the firm and the group. So, for instance, while GS FIG is considered a great group with top-notch exit opportunities, at the MBA associate level it might be seen as less of a hot destination compared to places such as EVR M&A or MS (Generalist pool). Also, RX recruiting isn't that challenging, considering that there is much less demand to it at the MBA level.
All the above based on conversations with our MBA summer associates (mix of M7 and T10 schools) in our group...
Interesting perspective, I appreciate the insight!
How about from a non-MBA perspective ?
Also I'm aware difficulty is very bank / group dependent but I'm more so generalizing locations and types into a large sub-group to really understand how competitive areas are in a general sense.
Bruh what is the point of this post LMAOO
LMAO. Ig just to assess how to navigate recruiting.
i.e. if west coast tech banking or NYC rx is the most competitive , maybe I shouldn't focus my efforts in only those areas despite it being my preferred.
what is your background and what school do you go to to have such a niche net casted lol
You have to keep in mind that for MBA summer associate recruiting, candidates are less "prestige" driven (except maybe for Asians candidates, that find it important for some reason). Students often look at IB as a career path, as opposed to a 2 year stint.
In addition, I wouldn't agree with the saying that "goldman is goldman". Plenty of kids from our class (think Stern/Booth/Wharton) avoided GS like the plague, due to (a) historically shitty return offers, and (b) subpar experience from prior classes. In these cases you have folks turning down GS (think it was the industrials group) for Citi or Guggenheim, a thing that would sound insane for someone recruiting for an analyst gig (ie, most kids here).
All this to say is that candidates will often look for a good brand name (and honestly all BBs (GS/MS/JPM/BofA/Barclays/Citi/UBS) and EBs (CVP/EVR/PJT/MOE/PWP/GHL/GUGG) will fit this aspect) but more importantly an environment/culture/whatever you want to call it where they can succeed long term. Their exit opportunities are not that exciting either way.
Gotcha, makes sense. But ig what I was wondering was how does location and banker type influence the average acceptance rate / difficulty ?
For not only MBA associates but also summer analyst path
You didn't mention this, but I would say that MF PE programs are substantially harder to get into than any banking group. I have seen people reject top tech and restructuring gigs to end up at one of these programs. These are probably just as hard to get as hedge funds out of undergrad (probably even a little harder given the limited number of seats available in MF PE).
UMM PE recruiting is also harder... There are just fewer spots compared to BB/EBs
Agreed -- all of my peers took MF SA offers over top IB SA offers if they were lucky enough to have the choice. There's another funnel from the top IB candidates up to MF for a reason. Also, a more impressive and unique background compared to the countless BB / EB analysts. Having a KKR or BX on your resume as a SA makes returning to a top bank practically a safety option, the other way around, not so much.
I’ve seen a fair share of splits between top IB SA and MF SA that aren’t flagship buyout, special situations or real estate private equity.
Porro odit cumque ea ut corrupti non. Recusandae quo quia consequatur voluptate et doloremque. Impedit id sunt quidem aut ut voluptas ipsa eaque. Sit rerum dolorem impedit sunt sed sunt veritatis. Ad asperiores provident sed velit. Sint quia non necessitatibus aperiam voluptatum earum.
Architecto voluptatem exercitationem earum quam rerum soluta itaque. Alias et totam alias amet et consectetur repudiandae. Sit dolor totam quis.
Quod voluptate eum sit aliquam accusantium et quam facilis. Officia sequi non sunt. Ut similique vel et quibusdam fuga hic recusandae non. Odit occaecati doloremque dolorem. Quia modi cupiditate et magni.
Ipsam repellendus labore quisquam et. Similique quo est soluta odio aliquid. Sapiente aut omnis exercitationem consequuntur quo. Molestias eos et eos eos reiciendis. Vitae sit dolor enim non ut.
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...