Everyone knows that if you go to MS M&A, Evercore M&A, GS TMT or any other top group, you're pretty much set for on-cycle MF PE recruiting. But what's the consensus on an average IB group at a BB/EB vs an analyst role at a so-so known MM PE fund? Would love for someone on the other side of the table to give their input.
| +106 | Is Everyone Too Bearish on PE? | 34 | 18h |
| +48 | Why would anyone do PE in long term in 2026? | 13 | 1d |
| +24 | Q&A: What It’s Actually Like Working at an Independent (Fundless) Sponsor | 4 | 3d |
| +22 | Do you think PE has actually helped you become a better entrepreneur? | 8 | 10h |
| +21 | MF Tech PE 2026 | 4 | 1h |
| +21 | UMM PE or High Paying Strat Finance? | 13 | 1d |
| +21 | Striking out in last rounds | 2 | 4d |
| +16 | Portfolio Marks | 8 | 7h |
| +15 | DELETE | 1 | 2d |
| +15 | Overwhelmed by amount of data / granularity | 3 | 2d |
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.
I have 0 first hand knowledge here, but my gut instinct would be that you're still better off coming from an IB route, even if its not from a premier group.
There will be one-off opportunities to lateral, but the tried and true path, especially to a MF will be from a bank. In the example that another poster gave above, getting one MF look from a headhunter is very different than closing on the position. I doubt a PE MF would hire a VC analyst/associate unless the VC was a premier VC and he/she was going into the MF growth/VC group. A VC analyst hired out of undergrad would not have the skills to be a PE MF Associate.
In my opinion, I don't think banking prepares you better for PE than actually doing PE, but LMM and MM PE is somewhat different from MF PE.
At a MF as an Associate, you're going to be more focused on modeling and more targeted diligence streams. It's less likely you'll be as valued on your investment sense, ability to work with management, ability to punch above your weight and lead a process etc. At a good MM fund you would in theory develop this broader PE skillset. While this would probably be better long term, those skills would be less applicable at a MF. They probably just prefer you to be rock solid on modeling and have good banking deal experience.
With all that being said, I think it could kind of go either way. Depends on the strength of the PE firm you're at. Your experience there, how formal the analyst training is etc.
Edit: Probably worth noting that I'm talking about starting as an analyst at a MM PE and trying to make the jump to MF associate in two years. As a poster mentioned below, if you started at a brand name MM fund and worked your way up from Analyst to Senior Associate/VP I think that's a different story
Thanks for your response, that's incredibly helpful. Would you say that if you do MM PE then you don't have to straight up do on-cycle recruiting for megafunds the moment you start as a FT analyst? I don't think I (or most FT analysts who do on-cycle as A1s for that matter) would have anything meaningful to say regarding deals after ~1 month on the job. I know as a banker you can postpone on-cycle recruiting for a year but have heard a lot of people just assume you couldn't get a job the year before even if you tell them otherwise. Wondering if the same thing applies to non-MF PE analysts.
Atque ipsa sunt quos tempora. Rerum ipsum dolorem enim quo illum aut. A quis neque dolores reprehenderit velit reprehenderit. Autem et soluta totam voluptate dolorem.
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...
Quis qui voluptas consectetur sit eum. Fuga praesentium eaque vel ab dolores accusamus dolor. Sit rerum nisi quo aliquid vero quaerat. Fuga possimus temporibus sit aut et. Facere qui unde ad quia aut qui est.
Accusamus omnis perferendis velit est autem ipsa sed quo. Sunt quos aliquid pariatur eos autem. Doloremque sit nihil fugiat eveniet alias. Sequi ut incidunt ea saepe saepe odio est dolore. Minus occaecati voluptates aut velit alias. Autem qui earum deserunt.
Qui praesentium laborum laborum sapiente est labore. Nam ullam qui provident. Quasi odit harum culpa dolores. Iste neque consectetur sapiente quo sed ut ipsa qui. Quia aut veritatis qui necessitatibus atque quia ad sunt. Ipsa exercitationem consectetur sit impedit. Aperiam sit numquam id maxime.