I can't believe I'm finally posting this after a couple years of skimming these forums, but I FINALLY received offers to become an investment banker. Though not the objective of this post, if anybody is curious about my path. Non-target UG (~3.5 GPA, not stellar) -> Audit at Big 4 (where I learned what IB is, and decided to take action to get there) -> M&A Transaction Advisory -> Bschool -> offers.
Upon receiving offers from Goldman, Evercore, and one other BB, I cancelled the rest of my superdays and focused on these options. What do you guys think? What's the better move? Goldman or Evercore (from the lens of a post MBA associate). Thinking about:
1. hours,
2. pay,
3. prestige,
4. exit ops
Thoughts? Thanks in advance, this forum has been super helpful and I imagine it'll be no different this time around.
Congratulations! There’s really no way to go wrong here. For most analysts, I would recommend Goldman for the brand name. However, given you are later in your career, you have to decide what you value more:
1) Hours - I would argue Goldman has better hours on average. Because Evercore is a smaller place, there are small BS things that you sometimes have to deal with. A friend a few years back mentioned he had to bind books which folks at BBs never have to worry about. Realistically this affects analysts more, but there Is just less back office support.
2) Pay - Evercore, hands down. Bonuses are consistently higher. For analysts, I would say average bonus at Evercore is higher by $10k. If you climb the ladder, Partners take a bigger cut of fees at Evercore.
3) Prestige - If you’re staying in finance I would say equal with the exception of Goldman TMT and FIG being more prestigious. If you think you might leave finance Goldman has a stronger brand name and more alumni in different fields.
4) Exit Ops - Buyside is difficult for associates but I’ve seen it done. I would argue Goldman is better on this front. From an analyst perspective, Goldman places better on average. The quartiles are equal but Goldman’s second and third quartiles do better than Evercore’s.
Hope this is helpful.
On some level, it's got to be worth something that everybody knows GS. This is me being shallow and an outsider, but your Tinder profile will do very well with 'Goldman Sachs' on it. I would die to make it into Evercore, but it's definitely not a household name.
There are a lot of awful answers ITT. I'll break it down by your points and then offer a few of my own viewpoints.
1) Hours are going to be roughly comparable and group specific. You'll get worked at both and at GS, specifically TMT and FIG, I would expect you'll work more than most groups at evercore. Evercore generalist can both be a blessing and a curse for hours. In reality, I don't think this should be making your decision for you.
2) Pay is significantly higher at Evercore. Both at the associate level and even more stark the higher you go. There is a well known Goldman discount even compared to other BBs, so that's only magnified at the EBs. We're talking between 50-75k more as a first year associate and it only gets larger.
3) Prestige? Who cares, unless you mean it in terms of exit ops. In terms of exit ops, you can go to any bank on the street from either. You can also get interviews at the same funds from either (which is not many, as an associate). Without prior banking background the MBA associates who end up making the switch to PE almost always go to small start up funds. If you want to go to a brand name fund, it's actually easier the more senior you are if you miss the analyst years because you may acquire a knowledge and expertise they want.
If you want to someday be in Corp Dev or a CFO, GS has the name recognition there and will be better. But most people hiring for those jobs are ex bankers, and these days Evercore is so large that all ex bankers know it's a great shop. So I don't think the gap is as big as some make it out to be.
4) See above.
Other things to consider:
Summer offer rates - Evercore's is significantly better. They routinely offer between 90-100% of their summers. Last year it was all but one summer in NYC in a class of 20. Goldman is generally between 75-80% on a larger class, and it's generally mandated, so even if everyone is awesome some people still get cut. That's not true at evercore.
Work experience: What is it you want to do? At Evercore you will get better M&A mandates early on that will force you to be a better technical banker. That's less true at GS. But at GS you'll have a broader experience. If debt and equity markets are of interest to you, you will want to be at GS because you won't see that nearly as much at Evercore (because you can't underwrite). You'll also get more client interaction and at an earlier stage at Evercore (not sure why someone above said you wouldn't get that at Evercore, at my EB I was in front of top clients within the first couple months and actually presented to one of the best brand name PE funds during my summer).
Also, to the guy above talking about someone binding their own books at Evercore and not getting back office support, he couldn't be more full of shit. Evercore has 2k employees and is doing 1.5b in revenue, they have as much back office support as any banker on the street. They staff more lean teams than GS, but that has nothing to do with bullshit like printing books.
Culture: The culture is actually very similar at both. Fairly laid back and academic, IMO. So I would try to figure out who you get along with best.
I am partial to the boutique experience, personally, and would take Evercore. But also understand the pull of GS. It's a tough decision, so make sure to do your due diligence.
This is very good advice. Not just in terms of the insight on both shops (I've worked at a couple of BBs - not GS and not a boutique, so no horse in this race) but also on some of the key differences between M&A vs Generalist IBD, and the nature of the exit options.
M&A vs Generalist IBD: advisory vs underwriting (Debt and Equity) is important here. My understanding is that client coverage at Goldman is done from IBD, and there are no M&A teams because that is their core business. Client coverage, therefore, will bring in debt and equity specialists as necessary for the client, and in order to do that, the advisor needs to be generally conversant and fluent in these topics to kickstart the conversation with clients and know WHEN/HOW to bring in these experts.
Is that something that's interesting to the OP? My personal $0.02 is that DCM gets old after about 3 days, and ECM in particular is about as interesting as watching paint dry - and even less analytical. (Sorry capital markets folks: it's a good career path though, gotta give you that). But some people really get their kicks from this, so the OP might too.
If you want advisory, though, it's the core business at GS, and it's THE business at Evercore.
Exit options: the previous poster was right in emphasizing that these are MBA-level exit options. Such as they are, for the buyside, they're comparable, and for corporates, GS has an edge, but Evercore will also be well-regarded. And most importantly: post-MBA Associate exit options are a fraction of pre-MBA Analyst options. Don't do IBD post-MBA for the exit options - you will be sorely disappointed.
Last thoughts: in terms of the people I know at both GS IBD and Evercore (current and former), if I were running a business or fund and wanted an advisor, the first banker who comes to mind is currently at Evercore. But, if I were in the OP's shoes, I'd have a hard time turning down GS (but probably would, because if I stayed I'd get paid less, and the exit options are less than people think they are). Rational vs emotional. Good problem to have!
First off, congrats. Both are great offers and you can’t really go wrong.
On hours, this will be very group dependent but GS tends to focus a lot on facetime. EVR’s culture is a lot more laid back so when things are not busy, people just go home. EVR also makes the job pretty mobile from what I hear so you can work remotely fairly easily. Not sure about GS.
As mentioned above, Pay will be much higher at EVR. GS tends to pay lower than most BB. Expect to make ~75k more in your first year at EVR.
Within finance circles there is no clear advantage in terms of prestige. Obvious the GS name is more well known outside of finance so if the goal is to bounce after a year or two, GS will be better. EVR people tend to stick around longer.
For exit opps, it really depends what you want to do. Because EVR is strictly M&A, you will get more reps on things relevant to PE firms so can be better set up for that if PE is the goal. If the goal is to work outside of finance at some point, as stated above, the GS name is more marketable for that.
On the other thing to consider I agree with things AllDay said above, aside from culture. I have friends at both and from what I hear the GS culture is brutally competitive (as evidenced by the summer offer rates) so can be a pretty trying place to work. The EVR people I know really love it there. I actually have one friend who started at GS and moved to EVR because the culture was so brutal. He much prefers EVR.
Can’t go wrong either way but decision really focuses on what’s most important to you. I think if you want to spend longer than a year or two in the job the obvious answer in Evercore. If you’re just looking for a marketable name on your resume and are okay with getting killed until you leave, go to GS.
Congrats on the offers. One thought on exit ops - as you move up the ladder, GS has way more opportunity for internal mobility. They will shift people to other parts of the firm at times. That may be a good or a bad thing, depending on your interests. I’ve seen former mid-level IB people move over to research, strategy, S&T, investing, GSAM, etc.
As usual, there is a lot of misinformation on this message board. Here's the deal:
Hours - they will be rough no matter where you end up, but it is tough to predict which firm will be harder until you know exactly which group you will work in.
Pay - pay is higher at Evercore.
Prestige - this is what sophomores in undergrad worry about. Focus on the transaction experience you can get. You can get great experience at either firm, but you will get a broader range of transaction experience working at Goldman or another BB than at a boutique.
Exit Ops - If you're worrying about exit ops as an SA, you're going to have a rough ride in IB. Grind it out for a few years, see which clients (including sponsors) you form the best relationships with, and take it from there.
My (hot) take - go to Goldman. If you're really worried about what's next, everyone has heard of Goldman, and you'll get exposure to M&A, ECM, DCM. My belief is that the variety of your experience will make you a better banker long-term and better position you to take advantage of exit opportunities as they emerge.
You say worrying about prestige is what sophomores do, then go on to recommend Goldman due to its prestige...
Why not take some advice from someone who's completely unqualified - You're welcome:
One thing I haven't heard anyone mention yet is the market. We are at the peak of a (very long) economic cycle, and M&A probably peaks this year or next (super hot in 2017 too I might add). I think its reasonable to be somewhat concerned about what happens to employees at a M&A only boutique if the cycle cools off (or worse, crashes). GS would seem to be a better option in such a scenario. If my recollection serves me correctly EVR really only became massive post GFC, so not much of a track record in navigating crisis as a big firm
This is a good point. Worth considering OP. My one counterpoint would be that in terms of the "pie" of M&A, boutiques have been continually taking more and more of that pie. In 2016 boutiques had 35% of total M&A advisory fees, in 2008 that was 20%, and I expect that number to keep rising. What's the "top"? I'm not sure, but I'm certain it's higher than that 35% number. Which means that it gives the boutiques an ability to continue to expand their business even in an M&A downturn.