Private Credit insights requested

Dear fellow monkeys

While I am fairly new to the entire industry and happy to almost start with my summer internship, I am currently doing my thesis and stuck on the following:

My research is about the relationship of different types of lenders with their customers (borrowers) and the impact on renegotiation outcomes.

Literature generally divides lenders into the following categories: commercial banks, investment banks, private equity, asset management and other categories (HF, Insurance, Finance companies).  

My hypothesis is that nonbank lenders, operating more on an incidental basis compared to relationship banking, are less willing to engage in renegotiations. I would expect that banks would be more willing to engage in renegotiations in order to win future businesses.

In my dataset is for instance:

Goldman Sachs & Co, Goldman Sachs Asset Management LP & Goldman Sachs Credit Partners  

Would you suggest classifying via either the first or second method? And why? 

Lender                                                        Class. Method 1                     Class. Method 2

Goldman Sachs & Co                                 Investment bank                     Investment bank

Goldman Sachs Asset Management LP     Investment bank                     Asset Management

Goldman Sachs Credit Partners                 Investment bank                     Private Credit

The purpose of the classification is mainly to distinguish between the degree of relationship with the borrower. 

If someone with experience in this field would be willing to share their personal experience or industry knowledge it would be of tremendous help to get in touch!

Many thanks fellow monkeys,

Best.

2 Comments
 

Class Method 2 is the correct one. For example, Goldman Sachs Asset Management is managing other people's money, so they aren't operating like a bank. They are not an investment bank. 

 

Qui laboriosam beatae soluta mollitia reiciendis rerum occaecati qui. Rerum dicta sint repellendus dolor vel quis expedita.

Nemo laboriosam aut et repellat. Necessitatibus est vel nesciunt. Molestiae ipsam eligendi optio qui voluptatum nisi. Ducimus quia qui voluptatibus.

Nostrum velit molestias rerum labore fugiat. Dignissimos accusantium optio velit quod magni occaecati nesciunt. Autem iste praesentium unde iste a enim et.

Minus est soluta ut fuga unde odio nostrum. Quia voluptas eveniet cumque voluptatibus qui. Placeat optio quasi quia eius ipsum.

Career Advancement Opportunities

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.5%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.4%
  • Guggenheim Partners 02 97.9%
  • Morgan Stanley 06 97.4%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.5%
  • Morgan Stanley 02 98.9%
  • Evercore 01 98.4%
  • Banco Santander 02 97.9%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.4%

Professional Growth Opportunities

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.5%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • Morgan Stanley 05 98.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 01 97.9%
  • JPMorgan No 97.4%

Total Avg Compensation

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (16) $429
  • Associates (56) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (28) $184
  • Intern/Summer Associate (16) $161
  • 1st Year Analyst (84) $151
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (76) $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

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
6
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
7
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
8
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
9
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
10
bolo up's picture
bolo up
98.8
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...”