Why are IB analysts so butthurt over CB?
I'm struggling to figure out why exactly CB gets a bad rep since tbh it seems like a much better deal. Same base at most banks and although it's a lower bonus the hours/bonus tradeoff seem to be much better. If you're getting 40-50k from Citi (2023 CB Bonus discussion) working 70-80 hours/week max that seems much more sustainable than 50-75k (bonuses I've seen on here) working 90-100 hours/week. I've read work is boring but IB is just rearranging PowerPoint logos too so it just seems like the pot calling the kettle black. I understand the largest argument is "exit opps" but considering most people never make MD and just end up in corp dev wouldn't it be smarter to just build a career in CB where you make more? I'm not trying to be petty and I know this post will probably get a lot of MS but I'm genuinely confused.
A lot of people go into IB planning to work in HF/PE or make MD. Or they don’t know but want to keep the options open. I think few bankers go into it for the IB Analyst pay. Maybe not all of them make the cut, but for a lot of people it’s the best decision they can make at the time
People go into IB for the training and to open doors. Nothing is wrong with CB but it's not a super ideal position to begin with unless you are really to make it a career. Most successful people in finance didn't come from CB.
the "open doors" thing is what prompted me to make this post. From what I understand only a small portion of analysts get PE associate roles and even then you get pushed out the door in 2 years. Similarly, HF roles also seem to have high turnover. From there most seem to end up in a corporate role. If this is the end goal for 90% of analysts regardless, the lifestyle/mental health/ borderline indentured servitude just does not seem remotely worth it.
I'm not certain which groups/banks have only a few analysts securing buyside positions, but a majority of my class (who actually wanted) attained seats at reputable firms. I agree with the idea of avoiding burnout, which holds some true for PE/HF roles, but the scope of exit opportunities extends beyond just these two sectors. The primary purpose of pursuing these paths is to gain exposure and genuinely discern your passion, facilitating a well-informed future career decision.
I'm inclined to disagree with the notion of sticking with CB for the long term solely because it offers comfort/good pay . Most individuals will cultivate other interests and wish to explore them, a transition made smoother by commencing in IB. Many of my friends have opted for GE/VC, which has a lower turnover and burnout rate (if you were to do CB, getting these seats would significantly harder). In my case, I'm pursuing PC, and I foresee minimal burnout potential in my chosen lifestyle; any switch would aim to delve into alternative interests (cb -> to pc is a common path so not saying cb would make it harder to break into pc).
Even obtaining a prominent corporate role becomes more feasible with an IB-> PE/HF background compared to CB. While I recognize your perspective that CB is comfortable and burnout-resistant, I believe it's essential to position oneself for optimal exploration across diverse fields. A career spans a lengthy period, during which various endeavors are sampled before settling on a long-term choice. Why constrain yourself prematurely?
Agreeing with the point below, CB is still a great job to have and is not really something that should be disrespected. The only people putting CB down are interns/prospects on this forum who are borderline autistic.
Dltd
following
So I was in a top CB group at a big balance sheet bank that had it grouped within the investment banking division (JPM/Citi/Bofa) and I made the move from CB to IB. The only argument for IB is if you specifically want to go into PE/HF. If you are trying to be a career banker, I would 100% pick and go back to CB. The skillset in CB is just not that transferrable to PE/HF, not to say that it cannot be done. Private credit however, is a very viable and common path that many of my ex-CB co workers took. I actually also know a few ex-coworkers that made the move from CB to HF/Growth/Venture/Buyout, but they were also just very hardworking/bright people in general that made time to study outside of work hours, and they also would put "Corporate & Investment Banking Analyst" (technically truthful since CB grouped witin IB) on their Linkedin/Resume so headhunters would reach out for those roles. When it comes to the work itself, IB is only a little more intellectually stimulating. For example, there's the modeling aspect in IB that can be technically interesting and in depth, whereas in CB your mostly working on internal credit memos and playing a support role to the IB team in terms of execution. However, at least in CB you don't have to suffer through failed pitches since most of the time, your gonna be doing investment grade debt deals that have a 95% chance of going through. So you will get to understand credit, cap structures, and overall debt markets very well. Pay is also more or less the same. When i was in CB, I was a top bucket analyst and my bonus was only 5k less than a top bucket IB analyst at my firm. My hours were also much better overall. Here's how I would breakdown the comparison, relative to all areas of high finance in general.
Investment Banking
Exit Opps - 9/10
Intellectual Stimulation - 7/10
Pay - 8/10
WLB - 80-100 hour work weeks
Corporate Banking
Exit Opps - 8/10
Intellectual Stimulation - 6/10
Pay - 7.5/10
WLB - 60-80 hour work weeks
TLDR - CB is a very respectable career path that deserves just as much respect as IB. Corporate bankers make just as much money (even more actually on an hourly basis) as Investment Bankers and have several, great exit opps as well. Anyone who is angry and butthurt just has an insecurity complex
Thanks for the insight. This basically summarized my thoughts from doing research and from what I've read on this forum. I just find the negative connotation really strange.
IB pay at 8/10? What jobs are 9/10 then? Assuming 10/10 is something like going to work directly for some HF where you can earn mid 6 figures fresh out of college.
Tech
perfectly reasonable arguments - until the last paragraph about "deserving just as much respect" etc.
Now of course respect / status / prestige are absurdly irrelevant BS measures in the course of a life that only hardos get hung up about.
And yet: the most self-defeating way in trying to get any respect at all is to demand or talk about deserving respect 🤷🏽♂️ 🙃
Disclaimer - I worked in banking and now I’m private equity. Others can and likely will disagree with me.
Your thought process seems to be that: (1) at the junior level, there’s significant variance in hours and less so in comp - so CB could be favorable and (2) very few people end up in banking long term, or PE/HF/etc, so why endure the early pain
In my view, the fundamental premise is flawed - I chose to go into banking because I believed in my ability to succeed in banking and thereafter an investing job. I genuinely like investing, and I wouldn’t have another path to this seat besides banking. I don’t mind the WLB sacrifice because I like what I do - and the now massive pay difference vs. CB is a bonus.
If you (1) know that you heavily prioritize WLB and (2) don’t care as much about comp down the road, and (3) are not passionate about any of the exit opps that only IV can open, then CB is a wonderful option.
If any of the above are false (which they are for most people on this forum), then CB does not make any sense in my view. You also seem to be underestimating the career trajectory of bankers - no, they do not “all end up in corporate roles.” Many end up in investing, whether they be LMM PE, large funds, hedge funds, FoF, growth equity, VC, etc. There are also startups, IR, philanthropic, family office, etc roles. From my banking analyst class in my group of 15 people, 1 is in corporate role. That number will increase over time, but they will transition at director / VP levels - not the lowly CD associate you seem to be thinking.
This.
People go into IBD and entry level jobs to learn a skillset and to set themselves up for more long-term career roles such as being an investor. The OP is approaching entry level jobs like the board game of LIFE where you pick up a card and stick with it forever and focus on passing life obstacles like buying a house or starting a family without ever thinking about that job again.
Unfortunately that's not a realistic case. No one really cares about 1st year or 2nd year salaries either when careers can last 40-50 years.
But are you saying that if someone goes into CB instead of IB out of college they will never be able to get a role like the ones you guys are discussing? Like you said, a career is decades long but in that time I feel like you could go CB -> IB -> PE -> other investing or CB -> Treasury -> Corporate. I understand it's definitely harder but it's not like you're just locked out of these roles forever. Consequently, you can also avoid the traumatic analyst years that might burn you out before you even get a chance to explore the other roles. My main point is I just don't see the immense upside to IB compared to CB and definitely don't understand why people believe it's significantly better. Seems like 1A/1B.
No ulterior motives. I've been more exposed to CB than IB so I'm admittedly a little biased. Just wanted to get more information before I recruit. Thanks for the insight.
This is a very naive post from OP.
The skillset built over the analyst years vs that of CB is worlds apart.
It's not just about PE or HF but facilitating a move to a world of different exits. CB is a banking career with minimal high finance exits.
Equally if you only get "moving logos" from your IB time then you're either bottom bucket and staffed on rubbish tasks or you've failed to get the most out of your analyst years.
A career in IB is significantly more in terms of compensation, especially from VP and up.
Finally, comparing CB and IB in terms of being the same tier of career is frankly laughable. CB bankers do an important job, but it's nowhere near in the same league.
This may hit hard and the truth will hurt and I'm sure I'll get bombed by CB Monkeysh*t, but that doesn't change the facts.
Man I'm no psychologist but this comment reads like you're coping with your life choices and now derive all your worth/happiness from your job. Imagine being Director in your 30s/40s venting on WSO posted by a 21 year old lmaoooo. CB:1 IB:0
First catch of the day.
Thank you for proving me right.
Now pls go sort that RCF draw down for the client.
I think it’s a superiority type thing. Maybe how someone in CB would view someone in commercial banking? Sometimes I find myself thinking this way too. Not a good look.
any comments on going from a product role (M&A) to a sector coverage role at a bank that is balance sheet/corporate bank focused? getting good headway in a japanese bank and i kinda want out from M&A
CB is fine and a decent career, but a lot of people seem to think it's a 40-50 hour job for ~70% of the IB pay. It can be pretty high hours... CB at my bank works ~70 as a baseline and certainly has some 90 hour weeks, although less than IB and you generally have more visibility. It stings to get a much lower bonus when you're still putting in pretty long hours.
As someone who loves working in CB, will throw out a few reasons why pursued by much fewer relative to IB:
With all that said, I love CB given the client relationship focus and the more sustainable career lifestyle while still getting to work with really interesting companies and transactions while not having to deal with the more painful parts of the process.
CB is 60-80 hrs on average? Holy shit, significantly more than I thought. Anyone who's saying IB is consistently 80-110 hours is exaggerating.
If CB is working 80 hours then what's the point? Y'all are only talking about the analyst level, but as you go up the pay gap gets wider and wider. Are we saying in 2021 when IB associates were pulling $500k, their corporate counterparts were pulling $400? No way
Lastly at the MD level, the difference has to be huge. You’re probably talking about millions in difference.
Its always fun to see people debating the trajectory of what my career may look like.
You aren’t the main character my friend
Completely agree.
It's because they drank the kool aid and think they're better than everyone else who didn't make the same decision for IB. Once they see that CB has it better than them, it's too damaging for the ego to admit that
1) you aren't as smart as you thought you were and
2) you didn't make the best choice when presented with all of the options.
IB has the notion that CB is for people who couldn't break into IB when that's far from the truth. The majority of people working in CB specifically chose CB because they believe IB isn't worth it. I honestly hope the CB slander continues and the IB sheep continue to lead themselves to the slaughterhouse. I'll be taking weekend trips and hitting the gym after work while IB works 100 hours a week to build their clearly superior skill set of powerpoint and filling in the bank's DCF and LBO templates (lol).
Talk about being insecure about your decision. You're justifying your choice by criticizing the decisions of those who chose IB, seemingly to appear more intelligent, despite having only started a few weeks ago. You're disregarding all the valid points raised by others earlier. Nevertheless, as someone mentioned, if you're content in CB, others' opinions are immaterial.
I'm not criticizing IB nor did I intend to. I'm simply reacting to their widely accepted criticism of CB that's so prevalent on campuses, online forums and in the workplace and gave my opinion on "why IB analysts are so butt hurt over CB".
It's one of many reasons that people tend to think CB doesn't model, doesn't get paid nearly as much as IB, has no exit ops and therefore is less than. IB doesn't like to hear of people making 70-80% of their comp while working half the hours and still having access to great exit ops.
Someone below put it best - nobody who works in IB is comparing their lives to CB. This thread is the first time I’ve thought about CB since I was discovering what finance was in UG.
If you read the above posts, you’ll see most people heavily caveat that whether CB or IB is better is dependent on each person’s goals and values. There is no objective best.
Posts like yours are not only useless, but downright harmful. It reeks of arrogance that is based on, frankly, nothing. I’m sorry.
and yes; I’ll let my ego speak up here but only to prove you wrong - thanks to doing 2 years in IB, I now do a job that I’m excellent at and love (PE), I get paid many many multiples of what CB does, I have taken weekend trips 3 of the past 5 weekends, and haven’t missed a non-rest day gym hit in 3 months. Banking sucked - but I learned a lot, made good friends, and my life is so much better for it. None of what I have right now would have been possible if I chose “the better path” per you.
Nobody is butthurt about CB. IB analysts are too busy getting crushed and / or recruiting for PE to even think about what corporate bankers are doing.
I wonder if CB is more susceptible to automation?
Nah regulators wouldn’t let that happen on underwriting and winning mandates is still relationship based
what is corporate banking lol ?
From someone who's been in finance 20 years so hopefully there's some perspective here, the biggest differentiator in my opinion is the quality of the network you build. If you have long term plans of running your own fund / running for congress or some other political role etc, the network you build in IB/PE is second to none, in the sense you can start from an inner city school and make it as a big shot. Same reason why people go to the Ivies, researchers have done surveys where the long term pay of Ivy grads and public school grads are essentially undifferentiated, but the difference is that the Ivies gives you the OPTIONALITY of getting into the highest echelons of finance, politics, etc.
let's just agree that both IB and CB suck
I don’t think anyone is butthurt. The reality is IB has a different set of exit ops and most analysts plan to spend 2 years and bounce to PE. Corporate banking doesn’t do a great job for PE/HF, but it does do fine for private credit. Corporate banking has a narrower set of exits for instance if you go corporate it’s more likely to be within treasury than corp dev.
As a career, IB vs Corporate Banking is a bit more nuanced, being in a group that relies on a firm’s balance sheet does in a sense constrain exits versus coverage/M&A. If you want to leave corporate banking at Citi, you’re probably either moving to another BB or a super regional corporate bank. There’s no corporate banking boutique, but the same is largely true for product groups. I’d argue that corporate banking and capital markets tend to be great places for a career, but there are some downsides.
Early 30’s. Promoted earlier this year. Clearing $500K in CB in a sales/client-facing role. I work an average of 50 hrs a week. Depending on the bank Corporate Banking might be under Commercial Banking, or it could be under Corporate & Investment Banking.
It’s comfortable. It’s sustainable. It’s not IB. It’s not prestigious. But it’s solid pay in a relatively low stress role that does not require me to work 70-80+ hours a week and I’m OK with that.
If prestige, exit opps, and maximizing your income are the most important things to you (and you’re fine working a lot more hours), CB is not for you. But if you want to make good money and still have WLB then it could be an option.
Wow. $500k for 50 hours a week on average? Debate aside, congrats for having made it. You just reminded me what we’re all working towards.
Enim dolorem similique praesentium id dolor molestiae. Dolor placeat laborum inventore doloremque est ratione et. Ea fuga voluptatibus nemo omnis nobis ut consequuntur. Sed ut ab soluta inventore dolores maxime deleniti qui. Voluptatibus aliquam voluptas in aut eum maxime.
Optio eaque nobis molestiae et voluptas voluptas ut. Eum accusantium dolores corporis et nobis qui consequuntur. Ut temporibus velit quo tempora nesciunt numquam voluptate velit.
Vel quo molestiae nihil id eum sed blanditiis perferendis. Corporis eaque quas expedita at officiis molestiae laboriosam. Animi ut repellat dolores rerum qui ipsa quia reiciendis. Eveniet iusto doloribus ab expedita animi. Vitae vel qui ipsam et. Ut et adipisci blanditiis quis voluptas eum aut ut.
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...
Doloribus debitis possimus sint exercitationem. Veritatis doloribus rem occaecati aspernatur aut praesentium. Assumenda et eligendi alias nisi voluptas exercitationem sit. Et distinctio harum ut vero dolor. Praesentium fugiat nobis nisi voluptas soluta. Aut sit sed doloremque sit dolor.
Dolor veniam amet eligendi mollitia cum dolores aut. Perspiciatis temporibus dignissimos pariatur eligendi quia sunt. Aut et facilis qui quasi voluptatem. Corporis doloremque ipsa quod tenetur quo mollitia odio.
Quasi veniam quos ea eius in. Voluptatem saepe quam repellat soluta. Aspernatur dolore aut quia quaerat dicta. Reiciendis quibusdam repudiandae quia facere omnis incidunt ut.
Voluptas laboriosam rerum doloribus est facere iusto. Quod deleniti nisi corporis voluptate reprehenderit quia. Beatae quidem maxime quia sed eos reiciendis explicabo.
At a reiciendis facilis veritatis et at non. Voluptatem numquam quae dolorum rerum laboriosam est nisi. Rem quibusdam ducimus quia itaque deserunt ipsum.
Vero corporis voluptatum impedit necessitatibus animi et distinctio. Porro praesentium et omnis illum facere consectetur nihil debitis. Vel enim et eum dicta in quaerat et.