Networking or Merit?

Networking is key. You could have the most impressive resume, but at the end of the day the people getting interviews are those who have networked.

Both are important. Networking helps get you a first round, your merits will carry you to an offer. Just to add, you underestimate the number of qualified candidates there are. There are far more 3.7+ gpa students who also network their ass off than spots on the street for them.

When you begin recruiting, you'll see that a perfect transcript or a perfect resume will not necessarily translate to getting an interview. The reality is that most things in banking are trainable. You don't need a 4.0 engineering genius from a target to make pitch books, spread comps, pull a DCF, take notes, or do many of the things that a typical analyst does. You need someone with decent intelligence, curiosity, and work ethic. This is all to say that, networking is super key. Your resume and transcript won't matter if you can't get your name out there and bond with the analysts.

EDIT: I would also argue that networking skill is a huge part of "merit" you need in finance.

why not do both? I say this as someone who is smack in the middle of this; had engineering major at a 3.7 and networked aggressively and got in lol

It's about the people you know not what you know

Networking > “merit” for banking. Kids who network are known quantities and if they’re liked they would probably be a good fit. Those who don’t network are less likely even if they are “better”. I don’t network much and just have a very strong resume, so I get less banking interviews but HFs tend to like me since apparently they put far less emphasis on networking.

Networking shows merit

Really can't stress how important networking is. You could be the smartest kid in the country but you won't get hired if no one knows of you. I'm about to start at a BB bank (GS/JPM/MS) as an analyst in one of the coverage groups, came from a non-target school. Only landed my internship/subsequent job because I networked my ass off.

Totally depends bruvva. Almost all interviewed candidates resumes’ are comparable within margin, so networking can win it over

It's hard to say without speaking with the candidates. If the 4.0 is bad at interviewing / communicating, then it'd be tough to pick them given strong communication skills are important as a junior banker.

For me, it comes down to who's put in the effort to connect with the group, who has strong academic performance (below a 3.5 is a no-go for a non-STEM major), who understands the job, who has relevant internship experience, and most importantly is teachable. Knowing how to do linear algebra won't necessarily make you a strong banker.

My ideal candidate is someone who understands the value of constructive criticism, is willing to work hard, is teachable, and has a demonstrated interest in my coverage group. This job isn't difficult - it's just a mix of relatively easy tasks done in challenging conditions. Hope this is helpful.

This original post doesn't really make that much sense. The person who didn't do any networking won't get the interview so they have a 0% chance of getting the job.

I've been told a very high GPA can land you that 1st round interview, but from there your likeability/connection/personality/behaviorals are what matter. So to a certain extent you need both

I've seen kids with high GPA and good resumes get 1st rounds without or with minimal networking. I have also seen kids with low GPA get 1st rounds through networking. It just depends on the bank, their criteria and how they run their process.

Networking IS the merit they´re looking for, bro

This is the most hardo shit I've ever read on this forum (which is saying a lot) - its almost baffling to think some limp-dick with a 4.0 who thinks he's too good for networking is considered to be a "merit" candidate and not socially inept (no offense to the hustlers who get top grades AND network hard, mad respect) while the dude who goes out of his way to talk to people is considered sleazy and without "merit". smh

IMO people confuse networking and nepotism a lot, they think networking is some sort of magical free pass where once you get to know people in the bank you get the job automatically (which is by and large what nepotism is)...boy if only it was that easy, you still gotta prove yourself and demonstrate that you know ur shit technically and connect well w/ people.

I think no argument can be made of which path is easier (grades vs networking) since both are difficult in their own regard, it's still very much a crapshoot - just a matter of would you rather place you fate in the hands of HR, or a guy who actually works in the biz line (whether analyst or MD, obviously degree of effectiveness varies greatly)

Having said all that, seems like American BBs are gradually discouraging networking/referrals (looking at you JPM) and prefer to hire the overachieving 4.0 types who didnt network ("well-rounded candidates", in their words) while I feel like the hustler types end up more in Euro BBs, obviously there are exceptions and varies from biz unit to biz unit, just a personal observation

$0.02 from a guy who (barely) survived recruiting and landed offers both thru networking and direct web application

Networking is definitely very very important - but not at the expense of your academics or other experiences! It is also not only the quantity of networking you do, but quality. Sometimes it takes one person to help you in your career, and meeting that person may be a completely chance encounter or may be coming from WHAT and HOW you presented yourself when networking. As these things are also very subjective, I recommend you continue to do your best at both and don't think of them as separate success factors.