PJT and HL are the clear leaders in RX in Europe by far (US is slightly different with other shops being more competitive).
PWP is a decent place as they just started their restructuring practice 3(?) years ago in Europe and have already established a name. However, I heard mixed things about them and they oftentimes represent either shady clients or do more of capital structure advisory (which then becomes restructuring-ish). Definitely a good name but if you have the chance always go for HL or PJT in London and Europe in general (local teams) .
If there is still equity value, it is debt advisory and if there is none, it is RX (just a general rule and nothing absolute). What exactly do you want to know about PWP's practice? They are quite strong and advise corporates on how they most efficiently refinance themselves and how they should build up their cap structure to avoid any issues in the future.
I would take BB IBD tbh, cause in RX (apart from HL and PJT) it is mainly driven by some dealmakers. If they leave, then a once shiny name could also become very bad quickly (see Lazard). You don't have this issue in BB IBD. In RX you have such a great learning curve, but for this you definitely need to get live deal experience cause the dynamics and complexity are impossible to learn in a book. RX in a so-so boutique is useless in my opinion...
In the us HL is a pretty creditor heavy shop. Translates across the pond? Anything explain the lack of EVR presence? again in US Big RX moves since Serta especially.
Laz RX is a shell of what is used to be in London. Still strong brand and legacy practice but they lost a large number of people from Aso to MD over the last year.
Apparently they are (again) trying to rebuilt the team, hired new EMEA RX head from Moelis, and are rebuilding (fromerly strong) German RX presence as well. Curious to get further thoughts on this if anybody has further insights
It takes a while to re-build teams and even more so RX practices so they'll need some time. But honestly these days I cannot imagine them being anything else other than revolving doors. Let's see where these MDs are again in 2-3 years time...
Moelis is actually doing quite okay. Would say they come right after PJT/HL. Oftentimes they are on the big transactions as well but more in a junior role, for example advising bank groups.
Even though I would say they are much better than PWP, I would also consider the fact that PWP has a dedicated RX/Debt Advisory team while Moelis has a generalist pool. Depending on how much you want Credit, PWP might also make sense to choose.
I currently work in PJT RSSG / HL RX in London. These are the absolute top RX groups in the city. I have been in only 1 deal with Lazard on the other side and another with Rothschild. I have never worked on anything with Moelis, PWP or Evercore though I know a guy from my team that went to one of these 3 places.
hey mate, do you think having RX experience in london is actually meaningful? I have not tracked every exit but have noted the exits from the stronger RX teams in london are really underwhelming vs US or even conventional BB IB in london - and the good RX exits appear to be due to having 1-2 european languages and those individuals being grinders all things being equal.
TLDR: PJT, HL and other boutiques are actually better for Multi Managers, definitely better for anything credit related, SM is random so other factors matter more. MFPE Vanilla Buyout exits are lacklustre compared to US due to small analyst class with strongest people wanting to go the credit route, people not exiting as frequently (and those who do go predominantly credit), and maybe only the lesser quality candidates recruiting for buyout as the top go for ss/dd
Long read: there are a lot of factors to consider when looking at the exits of boutiques (specifically rx) in London. I'll be referring to PJT and HL only as they are the only places worth it for RX specifically (more so PJT as most of my good friends are from there). To clarify I never worked at either PJT or HL. Firstly, lets break down what the different funds look for in a candidate and how they would rank here:
Multi Manager Hedge Funds:
Hiring here is not tailored at all and anyone could get a shot at interviewing provided they are interested and work in a relatively decent area. Throughout the time I worked at one of the big 4, I worked with people from all types of backgrounds (PE, other HFs, random LO's, RX, M&A, ER, even consulting, you name it). However, in 2 pods I worked at which were the most successful in the entire office on a regional basis, the lead PMs both explicitly stated that they have a very strong preference for people at PJT and/ or one of the 2 leading teams at Roths (HC and Consumer). They both agreed that the technical skillset and responsibilities that the people at these places have are above the rest, and bus dev should prioritise them if anyone from there is interested. Have seen co workers from PJT and or HL RX here. Any good bank wont hold you back if you want a MM. good boutiques will actually improve your chances (specifically pjt and roths hc/consumer)
Single Manager Hedge Funds (L/S Equity):
Hiring here is even more random than Multi Managers. I know many sr partners at all the top funds (TCI, Lansdowne, Egerton, AKO, Pelham, multi strats like Farallon etc), and the issue with these funds is a seat opens up every 2-5 years. Hiring is very random - they prefer hiring people from good banks (which includes PJT & co), from other hedge funds, or on the off chance someone from LO or a PE wild card. What's much more important is if you can get referred to them through word of mouth/mutual connection. Pretty much unfair to generalise how someone ends up at one of these places as its more luck than anything
Special Sits/Distressed/Credit
As expected, exits here for PJT are top notch. They include multiple people sent to Ares SS and PC, Apollo buyout, Sona, Oaktree global opps, Mudrick, Centerbridge, Angelo Gordon, SVP, Searchlight, BCC SS, Blantyre, Tresidor, CQS, Algebris, EQT Credit, KKR Credit, Triton Debt etc. I'm not entirely sure about HL RX as I dont know a ton from there, but I assume the exits are also great but a notch below PJT. I have a close friend from there who exited to one of the top 3 PC shops in Europe. When any fund which has a credit type mandate is hiring (specially distressed element), they are guaranteed to look at PJT then HL first (At least that's what we do and all my friends at similar type funds)
Vanilla Buyout:
Here is where the disconnect is. Exits from PJT include KKR buyout, Couple to KSL & Partners Group, Stellex (tbh could put them in dd), PSG, Norvestor, ASP, Blackrock, GIC. Good funds (some great), but not like the US team where everyone that doesn't go the HF route ends up at MFPE. You can break down the reasons to the following:
1) Majority if not all people who go to PJT and HL have a genuine interest in Credit/Distressed, which makes them lean heavily towards that whilst exiting (hence why the credit exits are great. I haven't met anyone who went to one of these places just for exits and isnt interested in credit, especially that most of these people probably had other options given how hard the recruiting process is for PJT compared to the BBs. This could also explain that maybe those who exit to vanilla buyout instead of credit style investing arent the "cream of the top", hence not ending up at mfpe.
2) PJTs analyst class is a lot smaller than the BBs. For reference, PJT office in London has about 140 people in FO roles from all seniority levels (from companies house). HL has it at around 60 but I think that's too low. In any case, PJT number for all employees is probably the size of 2/3 BBs analyst class across Europe. So there is just a lot less space for lots of exits (so less data points), and if someone exits they will most likely target credit side of things.
3) PJT in the US has institutionalised exits due to the 2 and out programme. Everyone in the RSSG team knows that they have to leave after 2 years, prompting the people that really want to exit to aim to go there. Add that to the high hiring standard and difficult interviews, you get people who are very technically sound and are laser focused on exiting. Coupled with excellent deal flow and MDs that pull for you, its a great mix. Contrast that with PJT in London which isn't 2 and out (they actually want to promote people). I also noticed that a lot of people who go to PJT might want to stay in banking over the long term, which reduces the amount of people who want to exit
4) A lot of the MFPE prefer people working on deals that are relatively large. HL predominantly focuses on the MM so isnt a great fit there. PJTs M&A Franchise is still growing, deals are usually large but deal flow isn't as consistent as the RX team. However, having spoken to a lot of my mates from MFPE about this, we all agreed that no one really cares about which bank you went to as long as its decent. Once you are infront of the investment team, its a level playing ground for all (whether GS, Greenhill, PJT, who cares).
5) HHs are the gatekeepers here for some processes, but you can usually bypass them if they wont let you into the process by emailing the fund directly etc. When we spoke with Kea, Blackwood etc, they all had nothing but praise for PJT guys so I would highly doubt that they wouldn't let you into these processes (especially that they manage the Apollo/KKR relationship and sent quite a few from PJT there
Rerum tempore hic consectetur vel soluta. Consequatur quia at voluptates officia. Est accusamus et deleniti totam eos iure veritatis.
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)
Sorry, you need to login or sign up in order to vote. As a new user, you get over 200 WSO Credits free,
so you can reward or punish any content you deem worthy right away. See you on the other side!
PJT and HL are the clear leaders in RX in Europe by far (US is slightly different with other shops being more competitive).
PWP is a decent place as they just started their restructuring practice 3(?) years ago in Europe and have already established a name. However, I heard mixed things about them and they oftentimes represent either shady clients or do more of capital structure advisory (which then becomes restructuring-ish). Definitely a good name but if you have the chance always go for HL or PJT in London and Europe in general (local teams) .
Hey do you mind elaborating on the cap stack advisory point? And would you take PWP RX over BB IB assume end goal was distressed/SS HF?
Well the rule of thumb is the following:
If there is still equity value, it is debt advisory and if there is none, it is RX (just a general rule and nothing absolute). What exactly do you want to know about PWP's practice? They are quite strong and advise corporates on how they most efficiently refinance themselves and how they should build up their cap structure to avoid any issues in the future.
I would take BB IBD tbh, cause in RX (apart from HL and PJT) it is mainly driven by some dealmakers. If they leave, then a once shiny name could also become very bad quickly (see Lazard). You don't have this issue in BB IBD. In RX you have such a great learning curve, but for this you definitely need to get live deal experience cause the dynamics and complexity are impossible to learn in a book. RX in a so-so boutique is useless in my opinion...
In the us HL is a pretty creditor heavy shop. Translates across the pond? Anything explain the lack of EVR presence? again in US Big RX moves since Serta especially.
Laz RX is a shell of what is used to be in London. Still strong brand and legacy practice but they lost a large number of people from Aso to MD over the last year.
Apparently they are (again) trying to rebuilt the team, hired new EMEA RX head from Moelis, and are rebuilding (fromerly strong) German RX presence as well. Curious to get further thoughts on this if anybody has further insights
It takes a while to re-build teams and even more so RX practices so they'll need some time. But honestly these days I cannot imagine them being anything else other than revolving doors. Let's see where these MDs are again in 2-3 years time...
Anyone have insights into evr rx / when analyst apps open for these places ?
Any insight into how MOE RX is doing in London, especially compared to PWP?
.
Moelis is actually doing quite okay. Would say they come right after PJT/HL. Oftentimes they are on the big transactions as well but more in a junior role, for example advising bank groups.
Even though I would say they are much better than PWP, I would also consider the fact that PWP has a dedicated RX/Debt Advisory team while Moelis has a generalist pool. Depending on how much you want Credit, PWP might also make sense to choose.
I currently work in PJT RSSG / HL RX in London. These are the absolute top RX groups in the city. I have been in only 1 deal with Lazard on the other side and another with Rothschild. I have never worked on anything with Moelis, PWP or Evercore though I know a guy from my team that went to one of these 3 places.
hey mate, do you think having RX experience in london is actually meaningful? I have not tracked every exit but have noted the exits from the stronger RX teams in london are really underwhelming vs US or even conventional BB IB in london - and the good RX exits appear to be due to having 1-2 european languages and those individuals being grinders all things being equal.
TLDR: PJT, HL and other boutiques are actually better for Multi Managers, definitely better for anything credit related, SM is random so other factors matter more. MFPE Vanilla Buyout exits are lacklustre compared to US due to small analyst class with strongest people wanting to go the credit route, people not exiting as frequently (and those who do go predominantly credit), and maybe only the lesser quality candidates recruiting for buyout as the top go for ss/dd
Long read: there are a lot of factors to consider when looking at the exits of boutiques (specifically rx) in London. I'll be referring to PJT and HL only as they are the only places worth it for RX specifically (more so PJT as most of my good friends are from there). To clarify I never worked at either PJT or HL. Firstly, lets break down what the different funds look for in a candidate and how they would rank here:
Multi Manager Hedge Funds:
Hiring here is not tailored at all and anyone could get a shot at interviewing provided they are interested and work in a relatively decent area. Throughout the time I worked at one of the big 4, I worked with people from all types of backgrounds (PE, other HFs, random LO's, RX, M&A, ER, even consulting, you name it). However, in 2 pods I worked at which were the most successful in the entire office on a regional basis, the lead PMs both explicitly stated that they have a very strong preference for people at PJT and/ or one of the 2 leading teams at Roths (HC and Consumer). They both agreed that the technical skillset and responsibilities that the people at these places have are above the rest, and bus dev should prioritise them if anyone from there is interested. Have seen co workers from PJT and or HL RX here. Any good bank wont hold you back if you want a MM. good boutiques will actually improve your chances (specifically pjt and roths hc/consumer)
Single Manager Hedge Funds (L/S Equity):
Hiring here is even more random than Multi Managers. I know many sr partners at all the top funds (TCI, Lansdowne, Egerton, AKO, Pelham, multi strats like Farallon etc), and the issue with these funds is a seat opens up every 2-5 years. Hiring is very random - they prefer hiring people from good banks (which includes PJT & co), from other hedge funds, or on the off chance someone from LO or a PE wild card. What's much more important is if you can get referred to them through word of mouth/mutual connection. Pretty much unfair to generalise how someone ends up at one of these places as its more luck than anything
Special Sits/Distressed/Credit
As expected, exits here for PJT are top notch. They include multiple people sent to Ares SS and PC, Apollo buyout, Sona, Oaktree global opps, Mudrick, Centerbridge, Angelo Gordon, SVP, Searchlight, BCC SS, Blantyre, Tresidor, CQS, Algebris, EQT Credit, KKR Credit, Triton Debt etc. I'm not entirely sure about HL RX as I dont know a ton from there, but I assume the exits are also great but a notch below PJT. I have a close friend from there who exited to one of the top 3 PC shops in Europe. When any fund which has a credit type mandate is hiring (specially distressed element), they are guaranteed to look at PJT then HL first (At least that's what we do and all my friends at similar type funds)
Vanilla Buyout:
Here is where the disconnect is. Exits from PJT include KKR buyout, Couple to KSL & Partners Group, Stellex (tbh could put them in dd), PSG, Norvestor, ASP, Blackrock, GIC. Good funds (some great), but not like the US team where everyone that doesn't go the HF route ends up at MFPE. You can break down the reasons to the following:
1) Majority if not all people who go to PJT and HL have a genuine interest in Credit/Distressed, which makes them lean heavily towards that whilst exiting (hence why the credit exits are great. I haven't met anyone who went to one of these places just for exits and isnt interested in credit, especially that most of these people probably had other options given how hard the recruiting process is for PJT compared to the BBs. This could also explain that maybe those who exit to vanilla buyout instead of credit style investing arent the "cream of the top", hence not ending up at mfpe.
2) PJTs analyst class is a lot smaller than the BBs. For reference, PJT office in London has about 140 people in FO roles from all seniority levels (from companies house). HL has it at around 60 but I think that's too low. In any case, PJT number for all employees is probably the size of 2/3 BBs analyst class across Europe. So there is just a lot less space for lots of exits (so less data points), and if someone exits they will most likely target credit side of things.
3) PJT in the US has institutionalised exits due to the 2 and out programme. Everyone in the RSSG team knows that they have to leave after 2 years, prompting the people that really want to exit to aim to go there. Add that to the high hiring standard and difficult interviews, you get people who are very technically sound and are laser focused on exiting. Coupled with excellent deal flow and MDs that pull for you, its a great mix. Contrast that with PJT in London which isn't 2 and out (they actually want to promote people). I also noticed that a lot of people who go to PJT might want to stay in banking over the long term, which reduces the amount of people who want to exit
4) A lot of the MFPE prefer people working on deals that are relatively large. HL predominantly focuses on the MM so isnt a great fit there. PJTs M&A Franchise is still growing, deals are usually large but deal flow isn't as consistent as the RX team. However, having spoken to a lot of my mates from MFPE about this, we all agreed that no one really cares about which bank you went to as long as its decent. Once you are infront of the investment team, its a level playing ground for all (whether GS, Greenhill, PJT, who cares).
5) HHs are the gatekeepers here for some processes, but you can usually bypass them if they wont let you into the process by emailing the fund directly etc. When we spoke with Kea, Blackwood etc, they all had nothing but praise for PJT guys so I would highly doubt that they wouldn't let you into these processes (especially that they manage the Apollo/KKR relationship and sent quite a few from PJT there
Rerum tempore hic consectetur vel soluta. Consequatur quia at voluptates officia. Est accusamus et deleniti totam eos iure veritatis.
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...