Trending Content - Investment Banking Forum
| +196 | Why UBS Is the Worst Place to Start Your IB Career | 32 | 12h |
| +159 | ONLY THESE BANKS OR YOU STRUCK OUT | 39 | 19h |
| +65 | Firm Thinks I'm Lying About Offer | 20 | 18h |
| +58 | Indiana University Fraternity Pipelines | 35 | 9h |
| +40 | Rogo AI | 20 | 6h |
| +40 | Elite Boutique interview questions | 10 | 7h |
| +39 | Stay at Weak Dealflow Team or Lateral? | 12 | 1d |
| +37 | Suspended for a Year | 19 | 2h |
| +23 | 1st Half 2026 (1H26) RX IB & RX Co. Rankings | 16 | 5h |
| +22 | Is there anything worse than having no work? | 8 | 2d |
Career Resources
.
Nah, sometimes the business models are hard to get a grasp on but overall tech is one of the least complex/nuanced groups.
Would TMT being a largely EBITDA-driven industry play a role in its relative simplicity when compared to FIG/RE/O&G?
TMT is usually regarded as one of the most straight forward industry groups to be in. I am currently in a TMT tech group in SF and most tech companies have very simplified capital structures. (Little or no debt, all equity etc...) Tech related products are pretty straight forward too.
It depends from what perspective. From a business model perspective, tech is relatively simplistic in terms of understanding how companies make money and what are the financial, business model levers they can pull (widgets, services, subscriptions, licensing, etc.). By comparison, FIG (specifically banks, insurance, and specialty finance not fintech or Asset Management) companies have substantially more complex business models and capital structures to understand.
From a macro/competitive positioning and "what do they sell" perspective, I have found tech to be more complex than FIG given that to understand macro/competitive positioning you need to understand technology roadmaps, disruptions, etc. and these are constantly evolving. For products, understanding how they work and function, identifying real differentiating characteristics and why they matter takes a fair amount of time. Anecdotally, as a pure finance background type, when talking to a business unit person at a client, I was usually able to speak fairly competently and with good understanding of a FIG company's products and services. In tech, I just try to exhibit a fundamental understanding without sounding stupid since, even with my lofty finance degree, I'm 100% certain these engineers, programmers and other tech types could run me into the ground if I chose to entangle myself in the science and engineering of it all.
Do you need an engineering degree to be successful? No. Can it help sure. Caveat being only if your engineering degree is applicable to your coverage sub-vertical. Tech is a super broad space with tons of differentiation and nuance between sub-verticals. Try talking to a chemical engineer about artificial intelligence and you will quickly find yourself staring at each other in silence...
Est consectetur corporis quos culpa voluptates eos tenetur cumque. Ea quod doloribus facere voluptas omnis. Ut maxime et repudiandae animi et. Similique facilis cupiditate consequatur dignissimos. Maiores est mollitia laborum nesciunt velit.
Illo esse ducimus et quaerat nemo. Expedita sed animi inventore dolorum. Autem est est ut necessitatibus id facere qui.
Qui qui sed fugit iusto labore. Excepturi fugiat ut quasi eius quibusdam expedita ratione. Maxime et amet neque quam voluptatibus. Fugiat enim asperiores voluptatem quaerat ipsam modi.
Odio qui consequatur aut dicta velit dolor voluptas. Aliquid quae nesciunt eos qui. Nulla sit ut eum eveniet est laborum eos ipsum.
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...