Waiting to recruit for PE 'til 2nd year Analyst -- Too Risky?
It seems like so many IB analysts do PE recruiting on-cycle their first years as IB analysts. This strikes me as strange because -- after only working as analyst for a month or two -- you're already supposed to know that you want to ditch IB for PE?
What is the risk to waiting until your second year to recruit for PE? Are you perceived by some PE firms to be "too old," or are there fewer slots available? It just seems to me that you'd want to experience IB for a year, and the group that you're with, before you decide that you're going to switch both industries and firms... but it also seems like most analysts don't share this view and decide to recruit for PE during their first year.
I'm just trying to understand why this is the case.
The recruiting cycle is moving up so much that no analyst has done any meaningful work by the time they start recruiting — honestly I’m shocked at how early it happens now.
Even when I was a first year and it took place in February / March, most people hadn’t closed a deal. Think about it, you basically start at the desk in September, the first 2 months or so is usually pitchbooks and financings to get you back in the swing of things, and then you’re basically at the holidays.
That being said, a lot of funds recruit on cycle, so if you want to have the most options or to go the largest funds, it’s still the way to go. However, one could argue that as a second year you’ll be a much stronger candidate and thus stand out more. If you’re from a slightly weaker bank or group, this might end up being helpful. Even the large funds do hire people “off cycle” time to time. It is less common but it happens — someone from our group went to Apax after skipping the main recruiting season (was trying to figure out what he wanted to do and wasn’t sure yet when recruiting came around).