Rothschild vs Barclays (London)
Any thoughts on how these stack up? And any ideas on best groups at Rothschild / rep of UK M&A at Barc? Thanks
Trending Content - Investment Banking Forum
| +132 | New Article: Dramatic Slide as UBS #22 (US) & New Leadership Desperately Needed | 25 | 1d |
| +129 | Americas M&A League Table Q2 Updated | 60 | 32m |
| +76 | Wealthy Parents / Jaded | 25 | 3h |
| +62 | A COMPLETE GUIDE TO SUMMER INTERNSHIP RECRUITING | 11 | 1d |
| +45 | Boutique firm wants access to my LinkedIn? | 39 | 44m |
| +43 | Restructuring: Anti-climactic Experience | 10 | 1h |
| +33 | Investment Banking in Mexico | 9 | 1d |
| +31 | Investment Banking is Hard | 14 | 3h |
| +25 | IB Net Worth / Savings Check | 9 | 3h |
| +21 | Excel macros for QOL formatting | 0 | 5d |
Career Resources
Do you hold offers from both? Depends what you want.
Buyside? Go Barclays = still BB experince > MM, ask any recruiter in London Banker for life? Go Rothschild = faster career progression, better hours etc
Agree - Barclays seen as more prestigious by US buyside firms due to Lehman
I thought Nomura bought Lehman's EMEA operations? Though perceptions may be more important than reality?
How sure are you Barclays places better into the buyside? Rothschild is much more stable and very well respected in London. Ultimately oscar, go where you are most likely to succeed (get FT, get promoted, or whatever).
Who would you go for, in London, out of Credit Suisse or Lazard? I'm struggling.
Do you think being a BB would mean better exit opps, as they seem to be preferred in Europe. Not aware of which groups I'd be placed in yet either.
I have offers from both; one recruiter I spoke to said Barclays reputation is now considered by many as just out of BB and in the 'best of the rest' category, and that a high number of smaller deals makes you potentially more attractive on the buyside (in Europe) than a couple of big deals closed. What do you guys think?
To me, the pros and cons seem to be:
R has better overall prestige and reputation, amazing deal flow but more mid-market deals B still works on some top deals esp in UK, but is much less secure, both in terms of IBD seniors, junior job security and overall group structure
I think comp at Barclays is slightly higher, bonus-wise, from the surveys out there. Rothschild seems to have pretty low churn, which I think is a good sign. The recruiter I spoke to said exit to BB except for GS MS JP would be pretty feasible (if that was the route I was after), and GS MS JP possible but depends more on overall strength of candidate.
The other question is whether it's better to be at arguably the category leader (deal count not volume) vs one of the lowest BBs (so for US mega funds, you'd still be behind all the other higher BB candidates)?
OP - I would go for Barclays. One of the more experienced WSO monkeys mentioned that buyside recruiting is not as structured in Europe compared to the US, so I wouldn't worry about "just outside BB". Its up to you to actively approach the recruiters.
Nothing against Rothschild, they are a fantastic firm and have a stable culture (but many of your seniors are in banking for the long round so you get less support/advice re: buyside moves).
Which recruiter did you speak to?
Also, did they explain why exit to the top BBs from Rotshchild would be harder? Are they implying it is easier to lateral from a lower BB such as Barclays to the top ones then
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/ef588b42-860a-11e4-b248-00144feabdc0.htm… do you guys even read the news these days?
"...the biggest question hanging over Barclays is whether it should spin off its struggling investment bank..."
also, city > wharf and Roths offices are pash
I wonder how a bank that makes it to the top of US league tables and is on the top 5 -6 league table has a struggling investment bank..
It depends. I have worked in both boutiques and BB in Europe. In utilities which is the sector I cover boutiques tend to do asset transactions whilst BB work in the bigger transactions. This also happens because infra and utilities have a lot of financing attached to it. I think all comes down to the specific teams. Re your exit pops a person in BBs might have done more transactions than the counterpart in a boutique. Hope it helps
Between Roth and barc in Europe you can argue for both given R mad dealflow (especially PE transactions) but really in London CS vs Laz there js no debate. CS is a European powerhouse (better in Europe than the likes of Citi, b) while Lazard is far less prestigious in the UK vs NYC. Btw the ipad version of wso is not great. I cant ecen see my post
I see, it seems as though Lazard is less prestigious over here. But in terms of deal flow, hasn't CS been towaards the bottom of the league tables recently, whilst Lazard has experienced pretty good deal flow in the UK/Europe over the last year or two?
Rothschild is London is a much better brand name than Barclays and has much better deal flow. Not sure if that translates to buyside opps tho.
Barclays' US franchise is very good though given that it's ex-Lehman.
Nulla accusantium non sit et. Ipsum totam laborum ea perspiciatis similique numquam fugit voluptatem. Nulla minima rerum inventore omnis non quis harum.
Occaecati facere dolorem eius quod fuga ex at veritatis. Hic ducimus et maxime commodi laudantium.
Ea vel tempora voluptatem odio ut aspernatur a est. Dolores exercitationem non nemo. Voluptatem aliquid consequatur aliquam. Maxime tempora iste molestiae ducimus blanditiis quia autem. Consequuntur sunt nemo rerum officiis eum eum est veritatis. Cupiditate possimus iusto qui velit similique fugiat quis est.
Non rem nemo sit assumenda provident et assumenda. At dolore impedit voluptatem in ratione. Omnis aut optio hic possimus pariatur laboriosam.
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...