How would one rank the PE analyst programs (Blackstone, Bain, Warburg, Ares, Vista, KKR) from the standpoint of learning, culture, exits, promotion opportunity to partner for someone interested in TMT investing?
Which ones are worth forgoing a top BB group like GS TMT/MS M&A?
| +89 | Nothing to do at work & bored to hell | 9 | 1d |
| +67 | Do people over-index on 'moats' | 22 | 17h |
| +52 | Predicted Net Worth in Trodden Finance Path by 60? | 20 | 1d |
| +44 | Biggest (avoidable) failures in PE Investments? | 25 | 19h |
| +38 | Why is ROIC never really a topic when looking at companies IRL | 11 | 4d |
| +24 | What do you think of PE Value Creation Careers in 2026? | 7 | 31m |
| +15 | Honest opinions needed about lateraling | 5 | 3m |
| +12 | NY LMM PE Recruiting | 3 | 1d |
| +12 | How to approach Buyside Recruiting | 3 | 5d |
| +11 | Is it too late for me? (Rising College Junior) | 3 | 17h |
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’d take all the ones you listed over IB except Ares
what about ares specifically that makes it an exception?
Apart from Ares, the rest of the list are some of the absolute best spots to get out of any banking group — better to have a guaranteed seat at one of those rather than go to banking and recruit to a likely worse spot
Ares can barely raise their PE fund right now - not doing well
The average Evr analyst 1 right now would kill or at least do some heinous things to place at Ares. You have to remember that most analysts end up at MM's, even though there's disproportional placement to MF/UMM compared to perhaps some "worse" firms a lot of it is such self-selection since Evr ends up with better candidates due to the supposed great placements. Trust me. I thought the exact same way as you and having gone through the process and seeing the other analysts go through the process, UMM/MF placements are still extremely hard and not only not guaranteed but not the average outcome even from the "top tier" EB. Given this forums demographics of mostly prospects and interns, I expect people to give MS because they don't want to hear the truth but I hope I can be of help to at least some people who are in a privileged enough position to have receive a FT UMM/MF offer as well as a BB/EB one.
all of them
You have made at least 10 posts/comments in the past week about MF analyst programs. Stop jerking yourself off and get an offer first before asking if KKRs analyst program is better than MS Menlo Tech
^^
del
Not Menlo Tech and just trying to figure out if it’s worth the time to study and recruit lol
Ares is a credit firm so it positions differently to the firms listed in the post. Agreed its PE arm is struggling at the moment (does not look bright any time soon tbh) but other strategies are doing well and it’s still easier to lateral from Ares PE to another PE firm than trying to land a PE seat from m&a.
Disagree with this. Going from say an Ares PE (ACOF or ASOF) to one of the other firms you mentioned is not easier than going from a top banking analyst program to a top PE associate program.
I’m not saying it’s not possible (there was one guy a couple of years back who was an analyst at ACOF and then signed a PE associate offer at Silver Lake) but this is typically not very common because you will face many hurdles: most notably your peers potentially giving you shit or talking badly about you in the future, since the firm most likely hired you/invested their resources with the expectation you would stay with them for the long haul. Imagine them finding out you’re recruiting (which is even more likely to happen if you’re traveling during oncycle like you would if you’re an analyst at Ares (LA), Bain (Boston) or Vista (if you’re in Chicago or Austin, maybe even SF).
Top banking groups usually hire you knowing you’ll likely leave after two years. Even certain ones like PJT RSSG, EVR M&A/RX, and others help you connect with their UMM/MF PE clients during oncycle because it’s in their best interests for you to place at these funds (more future business for them).
Will caveat by saying that I am just a student interning in banking this summer but this was the overwhelming consesus advice I received from several mentors in UMM/MF PE across different seniority levels. I ended up receiving two MF PE summer analyst offers but opted for a top banking program given what I mentioned as well as the much lower return offer rates in MF PE summer internships (not your case since you’re recruiting for FT roles).
As others have noted, Ares is having a lot of problems right now - they've seen extremely high turnover over recent months and you can track their (lack of) fundraising progress publicly. Will not be anywhere near the size of its prior funds and won't be a good analyst experience
This is doesn't take into account something very important: a lot of the people at top BB/EB's end up at firms worse than Ares. The top MF/UMMs only have so many seats and the number of seats at ALL the UMM/MF's is significantly smaller than the number of the top BB/EB seats. Most kids at places like Evr end up at firms worse than Ares. This forum simply hypes up top firms too much because they have some UMM/MF placement and every prospect thinks they'll be among the lot who get the UMM/MF offer... the fact of the matter is every incoming analyst there thinks the same and yet most don't end up there for a reason. I would take Ares over where I am at in a heartbeat, the grass is just factually greener on the other side. The UMM/MFs are insanely competitive even from the top groups because once you get the interviews you are still competing with every single other super-target kid from the top BB/EB group who's a hardo. Simply put, recruiting at associate level is much harder and not a guarantee for literally anybody no matter what group. A firm like Ares still practically has its pick of the litter amongst top banking analysts given the broader number of seats between PE firms.
Analyst to associate conversion is never guaranteed at some of these firms though, especially in today’s market. Would also note that a lot of these PE analyst programs don’t offer the best training grounds - there’s a huge learning curve from analyst to associate as you’re not getting the modeling / deal reps as banking analysts as associates usually handle the modeling
Not guaranteed, but way higher than the chances of you getting a similar offer from a top BB/EB. There are so many resources for training and it's not rocket science, I think people overrate IB training. Also, a lot of IB work is literal bullshit window dressing for clients for pitching that is not reflective of actually developing an investor mindset. A lot of these analyst programs actually teach you to some extent how to think like an investor which is way more important long term. I think this forum/prospects/interns jerk off modeling too much, modelling is more of a check. It's very unlikely your modeling is gonna find some unique value add that's legitimate, it's more of a check on investments ultimately.
Maybe I am just a jaded top BB/EB analyst looking to hit my UMM/MF PE firm and disgruntled with IB but those are my views both from seeing what sponsors do/going through recruiting, and seeing others at my firm go through recruiting. Ofc experiences may vary. Also just wanna note that training programs at the MF's at least have more than definitely improved over time and there's. more analysts who have been promoted and so more people who know what you're going through. Again, I could be biased and it seems like my MF analyst friends are enjoying their experience, which definitely shapes my views to some extent,
See what you’re saying but disagree that it’s actually that hard for top kids. At EVR, many of the kids who want umm/mf PE end up in the same handful of groups, and you’ll see almost all of the kids in those groups get umm/mf PE. Those at the firm have seen the analyst exit lists for top groups. Definitely not the case that most end up at place worse than Ares. Chances are that if you’re the type of kid getting a MF analyst offer, you’re getting something similar coming from a top banking group (assuming you didn’t just get lucky and overachieve in UG recruiting).
Wake up prospective interns… You are lucky to land in any reputable buy side shops even out of top BB groups.
First get a full time offer in any of these shops and it’s not too late to take it from there
Can add some context as someone who went to a "top" banking group frequently discussed on this site compared to peers who took the MF PE analyst route. Generally, the training at these banks is very structured and you're encouraged to leave the program with a well-defined skill set. The same couldn't be said for all PE analyst programs. From peers I've spoken to these groups expect their PE analysts to come in already knowing how to do the majority of the job and aren't keen on teaching anyone how to do anything. If you're a self-learner you could thrive in an environment like this, but from a risk-to-reward point of view, it could be disadvantageous. By going to a top banking group even a mediocre analyst has a good shot at UMM/MF PE Associate role. Further, those former banking analysts who make the transition, frequently outperform the PE analysts who had a stay second chair to their PE associate rather than getting the reps in.
If you're going to be in a PE analyst program, you should be very thoughtful about which firm. I spoke with a recruiter about PE analysts programs because I was interested and learned that KKR had an analyst program but wasn't able to properly train analysts like banking and canceled the program. Since then they have reinstated the program, so can't speak for its effectiveness now, but the point stands that you are taking a larger risk going to one of these PE analyst programs vs a "top" banking group. Generally feel like it depends on the person, I would thoroughly vet whatever group you plan on joining and make sure its for the right reasons vs a name.
This is spot on, but then again I think if you aren't a self-learner or someone interested in at least teaching themselves how to do the job well, idk how far you'll make it in a career like this. At some point, people need to stop jerking off on modeling/exits/and dur "risk-to-reward". Also, I disagree about the risk-reward because the resources remain there and many associates are helpful... obviously not everyone is but it's ridiculous to say people aren't willing to help. Also, these associates are the same exact people who would be your senior analysts in banking especially if you are at a top BB/EB, so I don't see that point. I do agree that in terms of pure technical reps, the bankers outperform but I think post-analyst years from what I have heard and seen from upperclassmen that took the PE analyst route they outperform because A) more investing experience/thinking like an investor, B) More time to network both internally and externally, C) more of an ability to get senior mentors at the firm as you have 2 years to find seniors to support you, meaning you effectively have 4+ years to get people who want you to become an associate. I am going to a MF as an associate and heavily regret my choice looking at my MF analyst peers, but maybe it's just because I don't believe in the whole purely risk-minimize bullshit and plan on going downmarket eventually anyways.
Which ones have better or worse training programs?
I’ll play ball so hopefully you’ll eventually shut up on this website:
I believe the most robust training is offered by Vista and Warburg, I know each firm has multiple weeks of intense training for new analysts, all in-house.
Haven’t heard much about Bain or Ares, and Blackstone and KKR are much more “sink or swim” environments, with decent training, but I wouldn’t expect that to be even a fraction of what you’re expected on the desk, at any of these firms honestly.
I’ve had partners in MF PE who are alumni tell me to go with my EB offer instead of joining their PE analyst program. They said their associates who come out of IB are simply better because they’ve had more reps. Obviously there are other advantages to starting on the buy side right away (e.g., develop an investor’s mindset), but I don’t think you should blindly assume a PE analyst seat is better than a top BB or EB group. The type of person who lands a PE analyst program will also still recruit well out of IB if they go that route instead.
Edit: Don't give me monkey shit for contributing a civil perspective to a discussion thread. Instead, share your thoughts.
This is absolutely untrue. They probably told you that so your dumb self wouldn’t waste the firm’s time in recruiting there
This is why I think this argument is sometimes pointless and just comes down to the individual and their circumstances - because I have had ASOs to Senior Partners tell me to get into PE immediately, and definitely at the MF level.
Some seniors have conceded that the post-IB associates may be a bit quicker with their models, but the PE analysts definitely win in the long run. This is mainly because of the much more sophisticated investor mindset from the past two years, and I’d argue just as importantly - a much better internal network & rapport, which matters a LOT for promotion in PE with how political it is at any reputable PE firm.
Obviously just biased from my personal anecdotes and experience, but I’m at an MF with an analyst program, and I have truly found that anywhere from ASO to Partner, the people who have been there as analysts (or just the longest, in general) are the best number crunchers, dealmakers, and investors, and rise to the top.
I think the idea that “PE analysts definitely win in the long run” is cope and not necessarily the case. You’re making it sound like they’re running circles around the banking competition, which is just not true. At the end of the day, it depends on the individual, the firm, and the team, which is another factor people often neglect.
I mean, obviously I’m biased like I said, being at a MF with analysts, and also with past experience at another MF with analysts.
But out of the two firms I’ve experienced, I’ve kept up closely with the people - I’ve seen far more of the former IB analysts eventually get pushed out vs the former PE analysts (and I know the ones who wanted to stay, I’m not counting the ones who genuinely wanted to switch to VC/HF or something else).
Don’t think in any world where either side “runs circles” around the other - not the impression I was trying to give. Just a pattern I’ve seen where the PE analysts who want to stay get to the VP+ lvl say 80% of the time if they want it, vs ~50% of the IB ppl
Can anyone give some perspective on analyst roles in non-PE groups. E.g., BREDS at Blackstone or an Real Estate Credit spot at Apollo.
They are both super solid if thats what you’re interested in
One important factor that people don’t talk about is learning earlier on if you actually like pe. When you are in a pe analyst program you get first hand experience into the industry and truly get to understand what you do or don’t like about pe. Versus if you start in banking and follow the herd into pe recruiting, it will take you an extra 2-3 years to learn if that is the career path you want.
Ullam recusandae sit eveniet accusantium optio et. Nesciunt non aspernatur ea autem reiciendis eos quia. Eos nesciunt vel voluptatem optio quas totam tenetur.
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...
Sunt sed quos neque voluptate facere voluptatum quia. Voluptas voluptatem ex odio alias aut. Sit omnis maiores et voluptas est ut aspernatur.
Dolores consequuntur facere eveniet molestiae et sed et natus. Aut voluptate eum ex et ut voluptate soluta. Veritatis enim ut non. Vel aspernatur hic doloremque ullam ab. Distinctio esse molestiae laboriosam et dignissimos.
Ut perferendis necessitatibus sunt ipsum numquam eligendi nemo accusamus. Officiis recusandae autem animi sit animi excepturi repudiandae eaque. Consequatur voluptatem aut rerum delectus itaque facere reprehenderit.