LevFin modeling groups vs non-modeling groups, outcomes

I have a question about LevFin. I often see people recommend joining a modeling-heavy LevFin group like BofA or DB. What would be the downsides of going to an otherwise-top bank that doesn’t focus as much on modeling, like JPM? Is the main difference just less modeling in the daily work? If one wasn’t looking to exit into PE anyways, would the difference really matter? What if one just wanted to be a career banker in LevFin, would the hours then be less?

Thanks. 

5 Comments
 

If you're comparing modeling-heavy LevFin groups (like BofA or DB) to non-modeling groups (like JPM), here’s what you need to know:

  1. Modeling vs. Non-Modeling Work:

    • In modeling-heavy groups (e.g., BofA, DB, CS), analysts are deeply involved in building and tweaking financial models, particularly cash flow and debt repayment models. This provides a more technical skill set and a better-rounded understanding of deal mechanics.
    • Non-modeling groups (e.g., JPM, GS, MS) focus more on capital markets execution, such as pricing, market updates, and structuring. Analysts in these groups typically don’t touch the operating model, as it’s handled by M&A or coverage teams.
  2. Career Implications:

    • For PE Exits: Modeling-heavy groups are advantageous if you’re targeting private equity or other buy-side roles. PE firms value hands-on modeling experience, and being in a group that "holds the pen" on models can make you more competitive.
    • For Career Bankers: If you’re planning to stay in LevFin long-term, the difference may not matter as much. Non-modeling groups often have better hours, and the focus shifts to deal structuring, credit analysis, and relationship management—skills that are critical for a career banker.
  3. Hours:

    • Non-modeling groups generally have better hours compared to their modeling-heavy counterparts. This is because the work is less granular and doesn’t involve building or stress-testing models from scratch.
  4. Skill Development:

    • Modeling-heavy groups provide a more technical foundation, which can be useful even if you’re not exiting to PE. However, non-modeling groups offer exposure to capital markets and deal execution, which are equally valuable for certain career paths.
  5. Does It Matter If You’re Not Targeting PE?:

    • If PE isn’t your goal, the difference in modeling experience may not be as critical. Instead, focus on the group’s deal flow, culture, and alignment with your long-term goals. For example, JPM’s LevFin group has strong deal flow and a great reputation, even if it’s more capital markets-oriented.

In summary, the choice between a modeling-heavy and non-modeling LevFin group depends on your career goals. If you’re aiming for PE, go for a modeling-heavy group. If you’re looking to stay in LevFin or prioritize work-life balance, a non-modeling group like JPM could be a better fit.

Sources: Lev Fin Outlook & Best Groups 2020, Leveraged Finance – 2017 Update, For those of you who worked at a BB that has a separate modeling group (M&A), do you feel like you gain less technical skills?, Is modeling more difficult in certain sectors versus others?, JPM Lev Fin vs. BAML Lev Fin

I'm an AI bot trained on the most helpful WSO content across 17+ years.
 

No Banks model lol. They only do performative credit stat output. The no-go/go decision lies with Rísk team, as a director your duty should be to sweet talk the credit for the risk team to approve.


You won’t exit to PE, please bin that rubbish. You’ll most likely end up in Capital Market for PÉ, Private Credit or Global Credit for Credit funds. For these role deals rep matter than anything else haha

 

Et dolorum occaecati possimus nobis et. Et voluptas doloribus corporis vel non numquam. Aut eligendi modi suscipit et consequatur.

Sed et et qui doloribus eos voluptas laborum. Rerum non autem consequuntur doloremque aut aut aliquid. Et quia veniam sint dolorum. Voluptate deserunt maxime molestiae illo itaque ea dolor. Quos sint eaque commodi ad.

Debitis quia vel aliquid molestiae. Et qui praesentium ut veniam. Et dolores asperiores neque optio quo enim aspernatur. Quod voluptate asperiores dolore.

Inventore qui assumenda ullam dignissimos doloribus magni quam. Ut quidem dolor aliquid. Enim veritatis sunt veritatis delectus distinctio sit natus. Voluptatem corporis ipsum quia reprehenderit sequi temporibus culpa libero. Quia aut dolorem saepe ea. Voluptates id quam beatae modi quia.

Career Advancement Opportunities

July 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.3%
  • Guggenheim Partners 01 97.7%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

July 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Evercore No 98.8%
  • Morgan Stanley 01 98.3%
  • BMO Capital Markets 13 97.7%
  • Banco Santander 01 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

July 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • Morgan Stanley 06 98.3%
  • Goldman Sachs 01 97.7%
  • JPMorgan 01 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

July 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (15) $434
  • Associates (46) $258
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (22) $179
  • Intern/Summer Associate (13) $156
  • 1st Year Analyst (80) $150
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (73) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”