LTM US and Global M&A league tables
Hi all - would anyone happen to have LTM M&A league tables by any chance? Would greatly appreciate it!
Trending Content - Investment Banking Forum
| +439 | Don’t work at UBS - UBS Sucks | 40 | 10h |
| +327 | Article - UBS’ Investment Bank Keeps Losing Ground | 41 | 4d |
| +186 | Should My Intern Get a Return Offer? | 53 | 12h |
| +64 | When to Leave Office as Intern | 8 | 6d |
| +56 | F*ck it I'm Going to Med School | 19 | 1d |
| +40 | Living in greenwich as an analyst? | 8 | 9h |
| +39 | Would you rather be a Touse Squid or a Bouse Mogger in IB | 2 | 5d |
| +39 | Getting Laid in IB? | 20 | 4h |
| +32 | STEM student lost in London IB recruiting | 18 | 15h |
| +27 | NYC Associate Budget | 9 | 7h |
Career Resources
Did a quick LTM pull for global league tables - here's the results.
Firm - Disclosed Txn Value - # of Deals
1. GS - $948.9B - 328
2. JPM - $829.0B - 340
3. MS - $710.2B - 253
4. BofA - $580.7B - 242
5. Citi - $499.4B - 186
6. Evercore - $332.0B - 169
7. CVP - $277.4B - 83
8. UBS - $217.6B - 188
9. Barclays - $216.2B - 123
10. RBC - $206.9B - 153
11. Lazard - $196.5B - 230
12. WF - $189.4B - 66
13. DB - $170.3B - 99
14. Jefferies - $158.8B - 217
15. Guggenheim - $131.5B - 82
16. BNP - $126.4B - 144
17. Rothschid - $113.0B - 322
18. Moelis - $97.6B - 115
19. PWP - $94.4B - 77
20. BMO - $93.4B - 75
21. Mizuho - $78.4B - 72
22. Qatalyst - $78.0B - 12
23. TD - $76.5B - 95
24. PJT - $65.8B - 46
25. Petrie - $65.3B - 1
26. Piper Sandler - $58.7B - 151
27. HL - $55.0B - 319
28. MTS Health Partners - $53.4B - 10
29. Mediobanca - $52.2B - 54
30. HSBC - $51.1B - 24
31. Consello - $50.9B - 2
32. Jamieson - $47.0B - 52
33. William Blair - $44.9B - 127
34. LionTree - $37.4B - 21
35. Santander - $34.7B - 60
Did a quick LTM US M&A league tables
Firm - Disclosed Txn Value - # of Deals
1. GS - $843B - 241
2. JPM - $693B - 243
3. MS - $562B - 171
4. BofA - $483B - 161
5. Citi - $418B - 110
6. Evercore - $312B - 139
7. CVP - $263B - 69
8. WF - $189B - 66
9. RBC - $180B - 108
10. Barclays - $157B - 80
11. UBS - $147B - 93
12. Guggenheim - $131B - 80
13. Jefferies - $121B - 169
14. Lazard - $120B - 113
15. DB - $115B - 48
16. Moelis - $85B - 95
17. PWP - $83B - 57
18. Qatalyst - $77B - 11
19. BMO - $75B - 52
20. Mizuho - $72B - 46
21. BNP - $69B - 37
22. Petrie - $65B - 1
23. TD - $61B - 72
24. Piper Sandler - $57B - 130
25. PJT - $55B - 37
CVP’s been having quite the last twelve months, riding that biotech M&A wave.
So much of the top 5's contribution is from non us deals relative to evercore(they have like 4 medium sized emea advisory offices and a small apac presence) which makes Evercores ranking ridiculously impressive. Do you guys think that taking into account deal value per head that evercore/cvp is better than gs?
BNP at 16 overall and 21 US seems like it's punching way above its weight.
They’ve always been pretty high on league tables (around 20th) - it’s mainly due to their financing capabilities though, they’re often brought in to provide committed financing and also get thrown M&A league table credit.
Great info, thanks for the expanded table.
PWP does more deals than PJT?
Not sure why that's surprising - PJT and PWP have also had similarly strong and comparable M&A franchises. In terms of senior headcount, we have 71 non-restructuring strategic advisory partners and PWP has ~60 or so, although the numbers aren't exactly comparable as PJT has a sizable contingent of partners focused on shareholder activism and PWP strategic advisory also has some ancillary partners focused on non-M&A advisory work. Nevertheless, both M&A franchises are pretty similar in terms of size. A quick league table screen shows that both firms have tended to be around 15-30 in annual global M&A league tables, and M&A league tables for cumulative L4Y have PWP at 19th and PJT at 22nd.
Don't get me wrong, PJT's M&A franchise is strong and offers great deal experience and exits, but PWP's is just as strong and I think the popular perception among prospects tends to overrate PJT M&A and underrate PWP M&A significantly.
Interesting, thanks for the insight. Why do you think the differential in perception?
Just public perception. PWP takes more non-targets into their program so the perception reduces at the undergrad level. I don't get why this forum places PWP so low though, I always thought they were pretty strong and looking at this seems like PJT is severely overhyped on this forum.
Partially because PWP pays meaningfully less at the ASO and VP levels
Hmm that's an interesting question.
PJT RSSG no doubt adds a considerable boost to PJT M&A's reputation - prospects see PJT as the king of RX and also see their most prepared peers every year sign with PJT RSSG, and that as a whole boosts the entire firm's desirability and prestige in the eyes of prospects. PJT also tends to be more target-school heavy (especially with Wharton and Harvard), which boosts the perceived selectivity of the firm which further elevates the firm's perception among prospects. Furthermore, anecdotally I've noticed that the average prospect that comes here is far more focused on buyside recruiting than the street as a whole, and as a result PJT RSSG + M&A tends to have great placement every year, which prospects also notice.
In terms of the general M&A platform, PJT's practice has traditionally been concentrated in a few "sexy" sectors. PJT's always been a big Media + Telecom and REGAL player, and as a result PJT's gotten on a lot of those mega-deals, which also tend to be very high profile to the general public compared to, say, an Industrials or FIG deal.
On the other hand, I'd say PWP's M&A platform is much more well rounded, and PWP's built out far more comprehensive industry coverage. For example, whereas PJT's deal flow has traditionally been very Media + REGAL + some HC focused, PWP's built out great HC, Industrials, C&R, FIG, and Energy franchises (and they used to have a solid Media franchise as well). With that being said, I do think that one factor that leads to PWP's M&A franchise being more "low key" and flying under the radar is that PWP is not very present in a lot of "sexy" industries. For example, Tech has always been PWP's weakest industry coverage, PWP no longer has a media + telecom team, and PWP's HC group is nowhere to be found in biopharma/biotech, but rather is strong in the much more low-key devices and medtech verticals. Those "sexy" verticals also tend to have the highest occurrence of high-profile headliner mega-deals, thus while PWP still does very well in the large-cap space, PWP also tends to miss out on a lot of the highest profile mega deals in those growthy sectors (eg. you'll never find PWP on a Tech mega-deal and PWP is also nowhere to be found in the large-cap biotech M&A craze). Something you'll probably notice in aggregate M&A league tables and rankings is that while overall transaction value between PJT and PWP are comparable, far more of PJT's top-line txn volume number made up of those $40B+ deals whereas PWP tends to have more mid-cap and $20B deals.
Very true, a lot of those mega-deals over the past decade have been concentrated in TMT and HC (specifically biotech), and while PWP got on those AT&T deals for the ~5 years Woody was around, PWP Media + Telecom was basically just one man running the show and PWP just doesn't have much of a presence in Tech and biopharma/biotech.
I guess just speculation but is this likely to change with the new Centerview partner focusing on software that PWP just brought on to SF team
PJT also has Bx spinoff prestige
RBC did well this year, competing with UBS Barclays and DB in market share
RBC tends to do well in poor market conditions
It is interesting to see the MMs like BMO and Piper up on the league tables
Why do the league tables always overrate the commercial banks and underrate EBs/pure play MMs?
financing relationships - balance sheet banks can also get advisory credit when they are attached to a deal providing financing. For example, say on a large-cap M&A deal, the buyer may bring on GS, MS, BofA, BNP Paribas, and Wells Fargo all as advisors on paper (and they all get advisory credit), but in reality GS/MS is doing nearly all the advisory work (and receiving nearly all of the advisory fees) while BofA, BNP, WF are really just there to provide acquisition financing and get thrown advisory credit as a bone.
Repudiandae ut velit doloribus quo ipsam perspiciatis. Magnam iste voluptas ipsam enim facere. Suscipit quis consequatur eum. Alias et itaque nihil et.
Magnam itaque sed nihil ullam. Eaque asperiores deserunt qui atque vitae.
Itaque voluptatem voluptates alias commodi consequatur omnis modi. Blanditiis ad consequuntur possimus voluptate. Dolores inventore ab laboriosam. Dicta rem pariatur sint impedit natus sit quod.
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...
Soluta qui laboriosam ut id non sunt laudantium. In nesciunt velit perspiciatis quia libero molestiae error sint. Sunt eaque sapiente vitae quaerat eligendi saepe. Animi nostrum velit totam eum. Eaque reiciendis est aliquid eum magni et cum qui.
Qui est culpa dolore quae totam similique dolore nulla. Facilis ducimus et ea fugiat dolorem id. Laboriosam quis consequatur hic fugiat sed voluptatibus qui. Sit cum enim iure qui voluptates.
Enim blanditiis voluptates fugit enim repellendus qui. Ex consectetur placeat esse consequuntur accusamus qui quidem et.
Non et inventore voluptas. Corporis accusantium dolorem aliquid molestias. Corporis non nobis enim ut maxime.