Should I study for RX or skip?

could you expand a bit more on what you mean by backwards looking? do you mean it’s not as supportive to exits?

I think you have to really think about the exits and what you want. Honestly, rx is great but if you're really deadset on buyouts/growth/corp dev you should really just take the M&A gig. Rx is very popular now but honestly the work is over-glamorized on WSO. 

Greenhill is solid.... They were xplorenet creditor advisor AHG, incora, etc. Senior leadership is solid and they added a some new pieces. Deal flow is meh but exits are still very good. They have an institutionalized 2 and out program so there's been good track record of them placing well. If you have Greenhilll Rx and a top 4 bb I would take the BB unless you love rx more than your nan. 

Gugg is good and honestly I'd say deal flow is actually on par with all the traditional "T1 firms" people categorize here. They pulled serious mandates (Lumen, Mallinckrodt, Rite Aid, etc.). They are probably out of all the firms besides PJT have put the most effort in building out their practice. Bojmel is obviously a tank and Homer Parkhill wasn't a joke either he was a major guy at Roth Rx. I have had friends take Gugg Rx over BofA, and I have also had friends take a UBS over Gugg Rx. It really depends on what you want. I hear from a colleague they aren't supportive of buyside recruiting. Not sure if that's still the case

PWP is strong, and they get on very interesting mandates. They are really lean at the senior level ~4 partners. They are probably the smallest Rx group on the street (that is still competitive), but they are on do some pretty interesting things too. FTX obviously, but they did Royal Carribean's Amend and Extend and Sabre's pari-plus double dip financing. I have had kids in my school take PWP over JPM/MS , I have also seen people take PWP over Laz/Moe. I have also seen people take Citi over PWP. The "EB" route isn't for everybody, and I'd still argue that if you want optionality BB's are the best route to take. Exits are good-- but inconsistent. Some years the group places super well, other years not so much. I dont think the internship is truly "generalist" anymore iirc(not familiiar/not sure), but I think you choose to sit at a group for the majority of your internship and do the group process again for FT.

Laz rx is an interesting situation. They only have ~2 analysts in rx for their NYC office so the bulk of the analyst class is going to be in chicago. They had some fallout with Reid(L man) and Kurtz leaving isn't all that great. They aren't the same shop as they are but honestly they still pull solid mandates. Most C&R debtor stuff they are always pretty competitive with. Exits are very good. Not very familiar with the recruiting (we aren't targets lol) so can't comment much on recruiting decisions.

Moelis is strong. Party City, BlockFi, Carvana, Diamond Sports Group, etc. Lots of Jefferies DNA. They are a pretty good group and some of the seniors are pretty legit. I've met some of the worst assholes from this place though, exits are very good too. The question is do you really want to give you life up for it?The good part about moelis that's gone now is that they aren't "true generalists" now. You get placed specifically into groups. 

HL is strong but they are the largest by far in size. They are on some pretty interesting stuff (Bausch, LTL Management, Wework (advising softbank). I think they are not what they used to be anymore. They are great but they dont win the headline mandates anymore. That stuff always goes to Evercore and PJT. Exits are very good. Brand name is still strong.

Ducera probably is honestly strong. They have serious senior bench and I always see them pitching (similar to Moelis/HL). I've heard not-so-great things about their culture but honestly I think that if you can survive your analyst years there you can probably survive anything. I'm too tired to pull up reorg so i'll let you do the looking. Exits are credit-focused given nascency of the firm but I'd say their exits are meh. Some good some bad but it's a new firm.

CVP is a wildcard. They are also very lean and land some pretty impressive mandates. WSO shits on CVP/PWP/Ducera too much in my opinion. JOANN, Thrasio, Eyecare Partners, etc. I hear hours are bad (but that's pretty universal at CVP) and I'm pretty sure other people cross staff with rx  but exits are also very good. Brand name is pretty helpful.

Too lazy and tired to explain EVR/PJT they take the lion's share in all major/topical deals. Exits are great and speak for themselves.  Other groups I didn't mention are probably not really worth mentioning and not worth taking over any of the other Top/Mid BBs IMO.

Exits I'm sure you know factor more than just the group you're in. School honestly plays the largest factor. Then followed by bank/gpa. It's like GLC-- they have very solid placement but then you wonder is it really GLC's name brand? or is it the quality of the candidate (School in particular)? I think most people get that mixed up. That said if you want to maximize PE/Growth/Corpdev exits, focus on M&A. If you want to maximize distress/credit type exits obviously RX is the way to go (levfin is also great). 

One thing to note is the rx-specific groups always kick off recruiting the earliest. M&A stuff always kicks off later.

Good luck!