very confused on the positions in FINANCE
These are just general question so I can have some perspective about the different jobs in finance.
I've always been under the impression that outside of hedgefunds and private equity, investment banking is the most accessible career path for ambitious young college grads. But seeing some of the ibanking departments around, I've gotten very confused on which is ibanking and which is not.
As far as I know, ibanking consistent of 2 areas: corporate finance and sales and trading. I'm not interested in S&T so I wont mention it here. But corporate finance is then divided into basically 2 main functions: raising capital through IPOs and providing service on M&A. Am I right? So far that's pretty easy to understand. Here are the questions:
- Do analyst then get divided down into industry groups- i.e. Gary is in charge of both raising IPO AND doing M&A deals that might involved in the Communications industry if Gary is a Communications industry analyst?
- What are the equities and fixed income departments then? How do they fit into the ibanking framework that I've described? How about stuff like capital markets? Are they S&T or "ibanking"?
My 2nd question concerns with the relative prestige and pay level of these finance jobs. This is again so I can put things into perspective.
- How would you rank working as an ibanking analyst vs working in asset management?
- Is equity or fixed income research considered "back-office"?
- How about jobs like equity research at Fidelity? Are they as coveted and as prestigious as ibanking jobs at BB?
Thanks!
nothing is better than an analyst stint at a BB. nothing.
don't try to find equivalents to it... in hopes that they are easier to get into. no such thing exists.
try your damned hardest to get into analyst program at a BB.
why the hell would you go through life just lookin for whatever is the most 'coveted' or 'prestigious'. If you just do that you'll spend your life unfullfilled in a constant competition where the cards are stacked (by definition) against you. go for what YOU covet.
I go to a target school full of high achievers whose lives so far have been about getting the best marks and buffing up their resumes. Thus if they haven't developed a passion for anything in particular, it would make sense to go for the most lucrative and prestigious positions.
Also if they don't go for something which is highly coveted and hard to get, there's a feeling that they've short sold themselves in that they worked their ass off their entire schooling lives to end up in some moderate paying job which people who have taken it easy throughout university could also get into. I believe the term here is "sunk cost".
The whole investment banking terminology changes slightly from bank to bank. Theoretically speaking, investment banking is usually used to describe the corporate finance side. Sales and trading (S&T) is the other generic side of a bank, which is then split in to desks etc.
Don't get too worried about it all, the best way to figure it all out is to jump on to the particular firms web page. They normally have an in-depth explanation of the names and groupings of particular departments. Else, read the vault guide; it has a pretty concise explanation.
no, I said most "prestigious" and "coveted" not "most lucrative" they aren't exactly synonymous. lucrativeness is the most important characteristic for many, but I would think there are a few other things to consider as well.
Also your reasoning is flawed. Essentially you are saying 'I've already done so much so whether or not Im doing what I like I need to continue so I don't waste it'. There's an economic fallacy associated with that to- what's the name? Maybe Ill look it up and post later.
The fallacy is called "sunk cost", and it affects lots of people from undergrads to CEO's. Nowhere in my post did I say I supported such reasoning, I am merely explaining how many high achievers reason, and I'm sure anyone who is one or worked/studied with one will know what I mean.
That is, if one spent their whole life so far working your ass off and could not spare the time or effort to find their "true" passion or haven't found it yet (if there is one), why shouldn't they decide their first full time job based on pay or prestige? After all they've worked hard to place themselves in a position where they have the option of choosing such jobs.
did you read my previous post? I stated that "prestigious, coveted" is not exactly equal to "lucrative,pay" and I went on to state that lucrativeness is an important characteristic for many. So I AGREE- you would be pretty irrational not to consider lucrativeness but what Im debating is the "prestige, covet"
My mistake on the sunk cost reference. In your first post you didnt make it explicit that you were just giving an example (as opposed to actually supporting it).
I am going to come off rude, like I usually do, and people will talk crap because of it and because people dislike me. However, pick up your tampons and shut the fuck up. I am what you are all here “trying†to be, a BB analyst wheeeeee! So go ahead and bash me, and call me a joke, but if a joke is what I am any of you would become jokes rather quickly.
You cannot go after a job because of prestige; it should NOT be like that. Get a job that lets you complete what you want to in life and pays well too. However, if you have expensive taste and want to find the job that correlates best with it then yes BB analyst is the way to go. However, if you want to build a career of prestige it would be laughable to call being a BB analyst the best way to do this. There is no doubt that the two top prestige jobs in finance are: hedge fund manager and CEO. No where will you get more respect and be a BSD with a lot of cash. Hey even if you suck a CEO severance pay is not too shabby.
Hedge Fund Manager The best way to get in is to start your career at a hedge fund, crazy concept I know. There are LOADS, as big as the one I drop on PoppingCollars girlfriend, of smaller hedge funds that take undergraduates for an analyst stint and you can work your way up this HF ladder to get your experience and move on. The second best way is buy side research at a shop like Fidelity. If I had thought about it more as an undergraduate I would take an analyst job at Fido over ML everyday of the week: Great pay and benefits and a lot of prestige. Next comes BB analyst or PE analyst, harder to find then HF.
CEO You can go from failed artist to CEO because there is a plethora of companies, but I will only address the single best way. This is those financial management positions that allow you to rotate through the company rubbing shoulders with top execs. If you can do well then your first job out of the 2 year program will be a good one. I would even hypothesize if you took two graduates of equal skill one worked in a company’s strategy department and the other did the financial mentoring position and then worked for the same strategy department that second person would be about 2 years ahead of the first in terms of seniority and payscale.
tbroker, stop being a flaming drama queen. "people dont like me." wow, you're so controversial! just shut the fuck up about how impressively notorious you are (on an anonymous internet messageboard. wooo, good for you!) and stay on topic.
Guys, I knew that this was going to happen when I posted the original thread. My intention was not to start a philosophical debate about the evils of ibanking that we always hear. I'm not here to scold someone and tell him "Do what your love in life. Get out of banking". I have my own thoughts about these issues but I'm not going to post them in this thread.
My intent in asking about prestige and pay of different finance jobs is just to have a ballpark figure of what these jobs are. We all know that front office is better than operations. But if I dont even know what operations are and which jobs are operations, how can I evaluate my career opportunities? thank you
Im impressed by how quickly tbroker has become one of the most hated people on this board, partially by his own doing, and partially by some angry people here. Not to feed the fire, but why can't everyone just chill.
Sorry to hijack the thread.
I agree with the concept of people feeling like they sold themselves short, I definitely get that feeling sometimes. I for one want to get the best job I can, not just to set myself up for success in the future, but to help validate the work I've done in the past.
I agree that you do all of this work in college and internships you want to be dutifully rewarded with a great job and one should find it without sacrificing more than they are willing.
Also, I do not mind being one of the most hated people because I still get to help out alot of people and the ones who are "angry" just do not like the fact that I went to their dream school, had their dream job, and busted a load on their dream girl last weekend.
tbroker, you have me all wrong. i'm not one of those posters who hates you. perhaps i should've been more clear: stop bragging about how 'notorious' you are, because you really aren't at all.
i don't even know who you are. the only thing i remember about you is that you initiated a whole thread with some long post talking about your "fans" and "enemies." this is pathetic. this is like that circular concept of trying to get laid by spreading rumors in your high school about how much you get laid. seriously dude, this is just an IB discussion forum. there are no "social circles" here, there is no drama. you are not goign to find a wife here. all that shit is in your imagination.
Mark Klein is my biggest fan.
Est ut id veniam velit. Expedita qui perspiciatis aut enim qui. Nesciunt omnis rerum distinctio quis deleniti quis molestiae.
Ut voluptas expedita aut consequatur porro ut expedita. Sunt sunt quibusdam hic sit cupiditate qui voluptatem.
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...