Would a mid tier BB IB/EB position be better than this role considering it’s 80% sourcing (I.e. current associates said this)? I’m interested in growth equity more so than pe, but I’m not sure if it’s ideal to lose out on the technical modeling skills I would learn in IB. I’m thinking it may make more sense to go into IB first then growth equity.
| +141 | Future of PE | 32 | 2h |
| +34 | Best industry/job for entrepreneurship? | 9 | 1h |
| +20 | How to Get on Career Track / Stay Post ASO years | 6 | 4d |
| +18 | What are you actually using AI for in PE? | 3 | 3h |
| +18 | Burn Out in PE - What Comes Next? | 3 | 12h |
| +15 | KKR comp for Principal | 20 | 3d |
| +12 | MBA and Private Equity | 6 | 1d |
| +11 | Buyside in London with nice WLB and pay | 2 | 16h |
| +10 | Undergrad summer PE analyst positions | 3 | 1d |
| +9 | 2028 Oncycle PE | 11 | 14h |
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.
If you actually want to end up in growth equity, this opportunity would be a much better route IMO. You cut out the grueling buyside recruiting process and would have the same type of brand equity on your resume if not better (KKR vs. mid tier BB). Can't comment too much on the technical side but if you are pretty strong on excel / accounting already I personally don't think you are missing out on much.
If it truly is a sourcing role then I would be very cautious taking it as a first job. You will not learn the hard skills / investing reps by just sitting in a cubicle and making phone calls. Early on in your career you should focus on building a robust skill set. You are better off going to banking (any legit one really) & then recruiting for GE after two years when you will: (1) have hard/soft skills to actually think like an investor (2) be in a value creation position. I believe GA & Summit also structure theirs the same way so be aware
If this role is mainly sourcing what sort of backgrounds do they look for?
prolly T15 BB/EB SAs with priority for diversity kids
why just diversity? and surely a tech/VC background would be better no?
cuz there’s so few spots available with some many qualified candidates that there’s most likely a diversity kid who has similar stats to you. a diversity kid can help the firm get like $10k ish tax deductions so it just makes more sense to hire them imho
What’s this tax deduction?
ur so dumb lol
I’ll take a pro-sourcing stance here as a growth equity associate myself.
The most important asset any investor has is internal benchmarks — being able to know what’s good from a metrics perspective, what business models are interesting, and what problems are beneath the surface or around the corner.
When you call 500 companies a year, review initial data for 200, and seriously work toward an LOI for 25-50 you develop that mental model a LOT faster than you do in banking or consulting where you might be on one project for a long time, and might only own a small piece of it.
Being good at diligence is an important skill too... but the best prep for being good at growth equity DD is actually doing growth equity DD on the buyside, not sellside advisory work for control deals in larger / more mature businesses.
Diligence skills are also much more commoditized than sourcing skills, and the latter is what people get hired for at the senior level.
If you know you want to do growth, you’d be dumb not to take what sounds like a great opportunity.
do you think this is why you see a lot of relatively young partners at top vc/growth shops who worked at sourcing oriented shops out of undergrad/post banking? Does the sourcing skillset translate well to a principal/partner level positions at good vc firms due to your ability to network and idenitfy patterns?
I do think a sourcing skillset translates well to partner-level positions and many of the folks you see get promoted are often the strongest at origination.
That said, a lot of the reason for young partners is that VC / growth is generally just a flatter industry than PE or banking... for example, at Insight there's no Principal level, you just go straight from VP to MD, and VPs are able to lead deals themselves if it's under a certain size threshold.
would there be modelling in this type of interview? and if so what?
Does anyone know how this role compares to the other KKR analyst roles in PE, Credit, Real Estate, etc., in terms of compensation and hours? I understand it's less technical and mostly sourcing but am still curious if that makes a difference on other dimensions of the job.
Not sure about KKR, but I'm aware of comparable firms that pay analysts the same across those groups. Each program sets you up for different areas of course, and traditional PE will likely be viewed as the one with the most "prestige." Brand names like these tend to help across all categories, so if you think you'd like the space, go for it.
Anyone have insight on the recruiting process for this group? when interviews will be given out/the general timeline??
interviews given out in may
Has anyone received an interview invitation yet?
Ut reprehenderit dolor blanditiis reprehenderit. Fuga accusantium ut illo quo. Et ea dolore sint non pariatur qui. In qui reprehenderit id qui quis nesciunt inventore suscipit. Et enim officia et vitae voluptatum voluptatem. Voluptatem odit soluta voluptas repellat rerum quis.
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...