What's so good about Evercore?
Hey everyone,
I'm a sophomore getting into the full swing of recruiting and I've been browsing WSO a bit to hopefully get some insight into what to expect for this upcoming cycle.
Before joining WSO, I'd only ever heard of the bulge bracket banks and never knew independent advisory banks like Evercore, Centerview, PWP even existed. People on this site seem to herald "elite boutiques" and the whole "I'd take EVR over GS" thing but I'm having trouble getting a grip on why (besides the pay delta).
Can anyone go into a bit further detail about what's so good about Evercore and the rest of the EBs? What actually sets them apart from bigger bulge bracket banks?
Thanks!
I'm joining full time at an EB you mentioned instead of a top BB (GS/MS/JPM) and here are my personal reasons for doing so:
1. Much better compensation, plain and simple. Not only is the pay nearly $50k more for some EBs for first year analysts, but the comp also scales higher as you get promoted.
2. Better culture and the floor felt much less hierarchical. Senior folk do form good relationships with juniors and the smaller class size (~50 analysts per year nationwide) means you're able to get a more personal experience across the board. This also is a huge advantage for my next point:
3. Similar exit opportunities, if not better. Nowadays, the quality of analysts at EBs are highly recognized by headhunters/PE/HF, so if you plan on traditional exit opps, you definitely are not at a disadvantage for recruiting. MDs will vouch for analysts and pull connections to help with exit recruiting.
And, just to answer your original question, Evercore specifically is killing the M&A game above other EBs (except maybe Centerview). Just glancing at league tables, they're pulling in huge deals alongside Goldman, Morgan Stanley, and Citi with less than 2,000 employees globally. If you're interested in M&A, Evercore is 100% the place to be for the pay and experience.
Good luck with recruiting!
Agree with all of the said above. I'd also add that the learning exposure as a junior is better at banks like Evercore. My experience with bankers from Evercore was that they are much more technically equipped and polished than the BB counterparts. One comment I often hear from folks at the independent advisories is that they typically dig much deeper in conducting analysis. Also, many people who are focused on exiting to hedge/ distressed funds prefer these banks over BBs as well due to the experience and the looks they get from headhunters.
The reasons that you've heard of bulge bracket banks are because they're simply larger in number of employees, have longer history (before the emergence of independent banks like Blackstone, - now PJT - Evercore, Moelis & Centerview) and have retail banking presence with thousands of brick & mortar branches, which means you probably have a bank account from one of these banks. Trust me when I say that once you're in the high finance industry, more people respect M&A or Rx experience at Evercore than one at a BB. If you want to make sure that your cabbie knows the bank you work at, sure you go work for a BB. From my experience, all my buddies who chose Evercore over GS (personally never seen MS/JPM as contention) at top undergrads (Harvard, Wharton, Columbia, Georgetown, Chicago, Stern) knew themselves, weren't insecure about brand awareness amongst the entire world, and wanted the better experience.
Has #2 still held true in the current WFH environment? With all these threads floating around about analysts not being taken care of, especially the most recent class, just wondering if you have any insights on whether your second point is still true.
I agree with and echo everyone's comments. Evercore hands down is solid choice!
GS is overrated these days
If you were more inclined to stay in banking vs an exit op, would you recommend Evercore?
Evercore gives you solid M&A exposure and $200k as a first year analyst. That's all you need to know
Wait are you serious about the $200k for an A1 out of college? I CHOSE THE WRONG FIRM! Where are you getting this info from?
1st Yr: $95k base + $25k signing + $80k bonus
I can confirm the above - it's about 95k base / 25k signing / 75k - 95k bonus range
Source - Know multiple analysts in the NY office (don't know if these ranges change for satellite offices)
Funny story when my PE firm raised a new fund and asked if any of the wanted to participate, only the associates who came from Evercore made the $200k annual income for 3(?) years cut to qualify as an accredited investor
Woah how did I get so many bananas. I guess a follow up from this is that I was not one of the ex-Evercore associates and I have not done any TSLA/crypto yolo investments so my money is just rotting away... :(
I have so many regrets sigh
Maybe it depends on the school, but when I went to W ugrad the top finance kids tended to aim for EB (especially PJT, EVR, MOE LA, HL RX) or buyside, and those firms also recruited earlier (except for the BB women/lgbt/diversity events).
Id echo the reasons the first commenter mentioned, in addition to EBs offering RX experience. BBs also have more uncertainty due to group placement, however the top BB kids usually got the best groups. But yeah, “elite boutique” preference isnt just a WSO thing from my experience, but it likely varies by school, though no one really says that term in real life (in fact, id advise you to never mention that term in an interview)
This made me think of "IvyPlus". One of our backoffice interns said there is a thing called "IvyPlus".
Lmao, either your target or non-target.
New here, what does EBs mean?
Elite boutiques
Not sure which school you go to, but network and talk with top upperclassmen that went through banking recruiting. They’ll tell you the real deal is Evercore and other top independent advisories.
I'm a little skeptical on claims of better training and better culture. In my opinion, those are such group specific characteristics that it's hard to generalize across an entire firm unless you're talking about a very very small boutique.
However that said, have had a great experience working with Evercore bankers.
Training is probably hard to compare, but the laterals to even the “sweatiest” groups at Evercore like their lives a lot better than they did at their old BBs.
I was in a notoriously (for Evercore) poorly-repped group and still worked way less than than any of my buddies at other firms.
How were the hours for Post MBA Associates, 9:30-10/12 on average??
what are those sweaty groups at Evercore?
There are definitely things that are attractive about boutiques -- namely the compensation and positive sentiments attached to working at smaller institutions, be it the intimacy / responsibility / exposure or perceived exclusivity. But the largest driving factor behind competition for independent advisory roles being high is simply that the EBs recruit first. Thus, everyone interested in finance / banking will be recruiting for those roles. The best kids will get them, and the rest will keep recruiting through the summer and fall at the other BBs and independents. The underclassmen then see the best upperclassmen sign at the EBs and are convinced that those are the best roles because that's where the best kids are going and the cycle continues. If GS/MS/JPM started recruiting in February, I guarantee all the kids, no matter how gung ho they are about EBs, would still apply and take an offer there.
People definitely underestimate the importance of stuff like seeing where seniors/juniors at your school and in your clubs/fraternities go to work. Huge level of person to person as well as social (ie Evercore has cloud at target schools) influences that not enough people talk about.
EVR is paying $200k?
Tell me, associate.
original comment asked what UBS is paying analysts.. lol
I've worked at both BB and EB full-time, so I need to correct some of what is being said here.
What's being said about comp and exits is right. Also right on technical focus, although that's more a function of doing M&A than anything else. If youre doing BB M&A, you'll have the same technical excellence...same if your industry group demands technical excellence.
What isn't necessarily right:
Culture. If anyone tries to comment on culture for an entire bank, don't believe what they say. Since time immemorial, culture has depended on the group and the personalities/characteristics of the senior bankers. That's why you need to get to know the people in your group during recruiting.
Hierarchy. This also depends on the group. In both BB and EB, I've seen well-regarded analysts directly address and communicate with clients on their requests with minimal oversight from senior bankers. In both BB and EB, I've also seen average or below average analysts not get this treatment. Being at an EB doesn't mean you'll suddenly be given more responsibility, and if you're well-regarded people will trust you to execute so they don't have to.
League Tables. I don't pay much attention to bank-wide league tables (more attention paid to industry league tables). I will say that EBs in general are doing very well. But what people need to pay attention to are who are the key bankers in the industry, and at which banks do they sit. It's hard to figure that out as an intern though. But in just about every industry group, some star MDs are at EBs, some at BBs. Just follow those people
Placement concerns. I guess...I can't comment.
What's wrong: People respect M&A/Rx from Evercore > BB in high finance...only an intern would say that. I almost cringed when I read that tbh. What really matters is: 1) your experience, 2) who you work with, 3) how polished you are, 4) how detailed oriented you are, and 5) whether you can switch your mindset from thinking big picture vs. details, 6) etc. If you're at a bad group and lack all of the above, being at Evercore won't help.
Side question: is it just me or are undergrads the only ones who actually use the term "high finance"?
This is facts and youre just getting shit from the incoming summer hardos who jerk off to their eLiTe bOuTiquEs
This term actually has a long history. If you read any book about finance from the early 20th century they’ll use haute finance (haute is just high in French) to mean basically the finance industry/network of capital allocators. See Karl Polanyi’s The Great Transformation as an example. IMO it was stupid then and it’s stupid now, but it’s a funny phrase to come across so often.
Eh I think you’re alone here with that pet peeve. I personally like the term because jobs like FP&A, insurance underwriting, wealth management, etc. are very different from IB, HF, S&T, AM, or PE. I know jackshit about the finance world outside of “high finance”, which is why I find the term useful to differentiate what we’re talking about.
What really bothers me is when people actually say "elite boutique"....like I hope to God you don't acqtually use that term in person
One time my coworker (he was associate, I was analyst) told me we work at an elite boutique.
That was when I knew we were not an elite boutique.
Pm me
You get paid more and work less without damaging your exit opps? Seems like a pretty easy decision vs. most other banks (at least it was for me).
CV, PJT and MoCo pay more than Evercore, by the way (though you might be giving on culture, to varying extents, at each).
I'm at Moelis and we pay $90k base and $80k bonus. My friends at evercore make more than I do and work less hours tbh
As someone that (also?) works at Moelis and has been around for a couple bonus cycles - not sure where your information comes from. 1st years start at $85k base (unless this changed somehow in the last couple months) but bonuses have historically topped out at $100k. I'd say we are comped in-line if not a little better than Evercore kids at the top end, when you include bonuses but Evercore's bonus range is much narrower than ours. Don't have detail on PJT but Centerview has hands down the best comp though, with kids taking home ~$250k 1.5 years out of undergrad.
I worked at Evercore and have friends at each of the firms discussed. At the top buckets, MoCo comp is (slightly) better, PJT even more so, and Centerview the best.
As an analyst I wouldn't worry too much on the comp difference between a GS/MS and Evercore -- maybe at CVP it is enough of a difference to move the needle.
In my mind the bigger difference is (generally) better culture, though this does vary group to group. On an average, I would say the culture at a firm like Evercore, PWP, PJT, CVP is going to be better / less face-time vs. your average BB group.
More importantly though, with the exception of the occasional IPO that you are leading, financing work is incredibly uninteresting, and you don't really learn anything from each successive financing. The level of M&A exposure you'll get at a firm like Evercore, and the ability to work on both the execution as well as the 'coverage' piece of it, is quite differentiated, and will provide a significantly stronger experience than what you would get at a coverage BB group, or even an M&A group, where you have no exposure to the industry side of things.
When you combine all of these factors and consider that, within 'high finance' these are extremely well known / highly regarded, so you aren't really giving up anything in terms of exit opportunities, they are fantastic places to begin a career.
While I agree, as an ‘alum,’ that the personal / professional experience is the best part of analyst program at EVR, the difference in comp (for a middle-of-the road analyst) over two years vs. GS/MS is like $100k all-in. That’s a ton of cash for a 24yo.
That difference in analyst comp shouldn't matter all that much unless you're someone who isn't planning on staying in finance for the medium-term. Earnings power ramps up considerably in the traditional HF / PE exits if you're starting from a top bank and exiting to a top buyside firm. If you are one of those people planning on exiting the industry after your analyst years, optionality will matter more than comp difference. In which case, the appeal of the GS / MS / JPM brand is further reaching. So, if you value optionality outside of finance more, go with the wider appealing brand. If you plan on staying within the industry, year 1 earnings are inconsequential (even less so on post-tax basis), in which case you should value team / culture / learning experience more.
I mean I get this to an extent, but regardless of whether financing work is interesting or not, it's kind of the essence of... finance... don't you think? Like there is no other job in the world of "high finance" (your words) that rely solely on M&A without an in-depth understanding of the financing process. Even PE investors spend a substantial amount of time thinking about structuring and terms with bankers.
I guess my point is is that yeah, M&A is great and interesting, but knowledge of just that is like studying pure math-- it's useless in the vast majority of situations without a thorough understanding of the universe of products that make it work (e.g. debt/equity financing). I guess the only exception would be if you want to be an M&A banker for life.
Have you worked on a debt financing or non lead left on an IPO / equity issuance? The role of the coverage banker is basically nothing, just creating market pages and stock price charts. I can genuinely say that my incremental learning on any debt offering beyond the first one was close to if not 0. And working now on the investment side, those deals did not help even in the slightest.
Agree with the earlier poster - $100k for an analyst is a lot of money, but post tax and in the long run, really shouldn't be enough to sway the decision one way or the other IMO
DB is not Bulge Bracket
A lot has changed in the last ~3 years, and not just since WFH began (although that will probably cement / accelerate the deterioration). Ask literally any current analyst in NYC - EVR is trying to be the non-lending GS. Comp is still above street average, but is no longer industry leading relative to other BBs. Spend per head is down on all perks, and a lot of the annual traditions that used to make EVR great are going by the wayside - holiday parties, summer events, nice budgets for campus recruiting, etc. have all gotten paired back over the last couple of years. They hired a pretty remarkable amount of frankly useless ex-bulge bankers, and the experiment has not worked out with the exception of their Consumer group - industrials isn't doing much despite having a bunch of super expensive senior guys, real estate lost half its team when the old guard changed, etc. Long-time groups are now gone or restructured, with the head of P&U getting let go and the head of FinTech (both women btw) leaving for a client, transpo reshuffling, chemicals redoing the middle ranks, telecom bringing in mid/senior level folks with culture that didn't mesh, etc. They removed the truly differentiating element of the analyst program, which allowed you to be a generalist for 4 months before picking a group - now you're just placed in one like a BB, and both intern and FT analyst retention is down because of it. With the COO coming from GS and being the apparent successor to Ralph/Roger, he's brought over a lot of ex-GS practices and individuals, including a guy who used to be the internal talent / development guru from GS. It's just a fundamentally different place than it was 3-5 years ago.
Does this mean it's a bad place to start? Absolutely not, it's still better on average than the BBs on average, and still better than a number of the EBs (i.e. still better culture than Moelis, better chance of getting great deal exposure than PWP, etc.) - but the differentiating factors are ebbing away and others are catching up. There are still really good groups - I work with their info services & telecom teams a good deal, and other folks at my firm work with their consumer & insurance teams, and all are excellent at what they do - but it's no longer guaranteed that you have a good analyst experience there. Exits are still excellent, but as headcount grows that may normalize. If you had the opportunity to go to PJT/CV, certain groups at Laz/PWP, MS M&A, etc. it might be a real head scratcher of a decision these days, whereas I'm not sure that was the case previously.
Analyst at Evercore here - I think this is pretty accurate. I enjoy a good prestige circle jerk and ego pump as much as the next guy, but when you get down to the objective facts, most of the above points hold true.
Still super proud to have started my career here and glad I have the name on my resume, but Evercore has gotten much more institutionalized than CVP and PJT (some parts for the better, others not.)
This is 100% true. It’s turning into a bulge and the needle is pointed down vs. CV/PJT, at the junior levels. Don’t think Weinberg was the right choice.
Couldn't agree more with the last statement
Sounds like you see the “institutionalization” mostly as a negative? Any particular reasons for this?
Do you see any other future changes given the change at COO? Any new verticals that may rise up as good groups based on recent hires?
Great insight, +1 SB. Reminds me of an earlier thread about "Is Evercore the next BB"
[removed]
Given that you've worked at both, do you view the bridging (or combination) by EVR as a good or bad thing?
thoughts on Rx group?
EVR RX is lights out. BBs can't really compete in RX because they're conflicted, so the market is typically EVR, HL and PJT. Maybe LAZ too (not trying to throw shade in general if I missed a bank - point is it's non balance sheet/independent banks). The work is different than M&A, but the RX guys I've worked with are *very* good at their jobs. Analyst placement to SSG and distressed funds very strong as well
Any info on new grad FT Analyst pay (base/bonus) and deal flow/exits at EVR Houston? Energy & Houston as a whole is getting pummeled but heard EVR Houston is still doing well and potentially pivoting into Renewables/Power? Is this true?
Don't know anything about current environment / pivot, but pay was historically same as NYC (which is not uncommon but is truly absurd, heard rumors that the entire analyst class a few years back bought matching Porsches bc they had so much cash, although can't confirm for sure) and exits have always been strong - know of a couple folks who left Houston for MF jobs doing energy or infra PE in NYC/west coast.
Been a historically very strong office. Still doing alright but not nearly the same level of deal flow / fee generation as prior years given the market. Used to dominate sponsor m&a but in this market, that activity is nearly non-existent. Got a decent presence in O&G restructurings but not enough to offset lost m&a fees.
There is talk of getting into renewables but personally think it’s more of a recruiting PR tactic than anything. The truth is NYC will always be the hub for the renewables practice given similarities to P&U (conversely no similarities to the actual O&G industry).
Base pay same as NYC ($95k starting), bonuses historically been same as NYC but this year were down. Still one of the top paying shops in Houston alongside Jefferies (not this past year), TPH, Moelis and Guggenheim (surprising but true).
Exits have been very good, mostly to O&G / infra but a few to more diversified shops. That said, the buyside environment is fundamentally different now than a year ago. Most actionable opportunities are in infra and the skillset of working with O&G companies is much less in demand.
The short of it all is if you’re into oil and gas, its one of the best places to start your career and you’ll get paid very well (and keep more than NYC peers). But wouldn’t bet on the pivot to renewables/power and if your goal is generalist PE or anything else, it would be best to aim elsewhere.
Which one would you choose between EVR/MOE Houston Vs RBC Generalist M&A (Toronto)? I'm not opposed to O&G but am aware of the sector's limitations. That said - I imagine being at a EVR/MOE even in Houston probably still gets you top-tier exits in Infra/Renewables perhaps in more Tier 1ish cities as opposed to RBC M&A Toronto where the best exits would be the Canadian pension funds (CPP/OTPP/Onex)? You seem familiar with the Houston space so thought I'd ask!
Ab libero dolores et reprehenderit. Non molestias voluptatum assumenda repellendus a cupiditate qui.
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...
Repudiandae maiores magni delectus ducimus. Eligendi ut eos consequatur debitis quos.
Et cupiditate magni ducimus laboriosam iste ut iure. Voluptatem ut qui enim. Ullam neque aut velit dolorem autem aut.
Ea dolorem cum sint dolorem. Repellat tempora voluptas nesciunt eum. Repellendus quas omnis modi ipsum exercitationem dolor. Perferendis aut et inventore quidem. Ipsum ut esse numquam dolores dignissimos dignissimos. Blanditiis voluptas qui quo quia.
Quo veritatis sunt tenetur suscipit occaecati. Adipisci sit quos architecto repudiandae quis quam. Quos fugiat ea asperiores aut sapiente aliquam. Nostrum laboriosam nisi tempora expedita et dolorum minima.
Distinctio aut consectetur culpa ut voluptas eligendi vel. Suscipit ut et sapiente quod. Soluta qui et dignissimos vero. Sequi mollitia perferendis illum sunt. Magni non facere quia illo incidunt et natus.