Started at a small shop, but am getting quite confused as to why bigger deals are all the hype?
Honest question... Isn't the process and work involved quite similar between MM and billion dollar deals? (Pitching, marketing, valuation, liaising with bidders etc.)
| +148 | ONLY THESE BANKS OR YOU STRUCK OUT | 38 | 13h |
| +111 | IB Energy Drink Tier List / Ranking | 73 | 1d |
| +61 | Firm Thinks I'm Lying About Offer | 19 | 16h |
| +53 | Indiana University Fraternity Pipelines | 32 | 13h |
| +51 | Feedback for internship first desk at IBD BB - personal fit, "don't be too confident" | 29 | 2d |
| +39 | Stay at Weak Dealflow Team or Lateral? | 12 | 21h |
| +36 | Rogo AI | 14 | 11h |
| +34 | Elite Boutique interview questions | 8 | 1d |
| +30 | Suspended for a Year | 11 | 14h |
| +23 | 1st Half 2026 (1H26) RX IB & RX Co. Rankings | 14 | 1d |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
All else equal, for analysts, there’s very little process level differences (other than more regulatory scrutiny, extra nervous senior bankers asking for unnecessary work etc). Other than that, just credentialization and self congratulatory dick measuring.
For banks, bigger fee pool for a relatively similar amount of work. Plus creds and league table credit.
PRESTIGE
They get all the hype cause they are bigger. Like you said it’s hype, not a different process.
I will tell you that during interviewing I would only get asked about the mega deals on my resume, so they are good talking points.
Thats interesting - why do interviewers at the buyside exit opps care about the deal size? After all, isn't it more important to hire a skilled and experienced person that has done more small deals and knows the process well, rather than hiring someone that's gone through the process just a couple of times but on those trophy deals?
"why do interviewers at the buyside exit opps care about the deal size"
When I'm interviewing someone, I look down their deal sheet and ask them about one that jumps out, somewhat at random. I'm much more likely to ask about a deal if I've heard of it or know one of the companies involved, as it helps me ask relevant questions / probe what the candidate says / detect bullshit. That said, what's important is how well the candidate understands the process dynamic / deal logic, rather than how many billions were involved.
Lets take a look at these questions in a different way
You play football, is it the same to play the Champions League or the Second Division in England?
The short answer is, its the same sport but there's a difference when it comes to even small details of the process
Are there better players in the second division than in the champions league? There may be some of them, but usually best teams attract the best talent.
Same happens for PEs, they want the best talent and they will understand that the best training will be found in those banks that have the most complex / large deals, in which every detail counts. They will assume that these candidates are better prepared to succeed just for the pedigree.
Not that black and white IMO. Easier to land a higher up role at an LMM/MM fund or you could do your own thing. You'll pull more $$$ and it's easier to deliver better #s to LPs. You'll see former MF guys spin off and do their own thing but go down in fund size for this reason.
High profile public bilateral buyside M&A is a lot more fun and strategic than middle-market sellsides with a 3 digit buyer list
Generally disagree that experience in LMM vs mega deals is the same. Mega deals can have very large working groups, deeper DD and more focus areas, more structured process generally and buyers are more sophisticated and way more demanding.
Small deals can be sloppy in my experience.
Curious where deals around ~1B fit into this? At an an upper MM type bank and most of my deal experience is right around the mark. We’re typically working with very well known UMM/MF sponsors who are doing lots of diligence and running a pretty thorough process, so it’s not like some LMM deal that is super different. Is it still worse from the perspective of recruiting? Am I still missing out on a bunch that my peers at EBs are doing?
Non ea tempora sit reprehenderit. Voluptatum nesciunt quia et fuga possimus autem dicta. Omnis nesciunt quo quasi ipsum id architecto dolorem iure.
Eligendi consectetur reprehenderit nisi blanditiis. Quia architecto sit soluta quia qui accusamus consequatur similique. Sed architecto omnis temporibus. Tempora sit veniam consequatur in nisi repellendus. Voluptatem praesentium voluptatem dolorem non.
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...