PE GPA on cycle
for on cycle recruiting, at what gpa does gpa not make a difference at MF and UMM? is it worth it for a senior to push a 3.6 to 3.7 at semitarget or should they relax, etc?
Trending Content
| +30 | To all associates coming up on the 2 year mark, how bad is it to have no deals done? | 9 | 2h | |
| +27 | Easiest way to make about $2mm/y | 19 | 1d | |
| +26 | VP Level - when to follow up after final round | 10 | 1d | |
| +20 | Vista Lateral Associate | 11 | 3s | |
| +17 | Sr Asso / VP Unemployment Check-in | 2 | 1h | |
| +16 | IB/PE Lifers, Was It Worth It? | 5 | 16h | |
| +14 | Boss says one thing and does another | 7 | 47m | |
| +14 | EBITDA walkdown to cash flow for debt service | 10 | 5d | |
| +13 | Why is Blackstone so dominant? | 9 | 3d | |
| +12 | Late to the PE Recruiting Where Do I Even Start | 2 | 4d |
Career Resources
I didn't participate in on cycle, so take this with a grain of salt. I have seen dozens of UMM/MF PE associate resumes and have discussed this topic with H/S b-school buddies.
Headhunters score your profile. I don't know what formula it is. It could be 50 points for resume, 25 points for deal experience & technical skills, 25 points for behavioral & fit. Diversity and personal connections are extra credit. The earlier you recruit, the more they rely on your resume. They're risk averse.
Your resume consists of your banking group (most important), school, GPA, scores, former internships, etc. Allocate the points how you may and be realistic in scoring yourself.
The top ~10 or so funds interview whoever they want. There are enough candidates that score perfect or near perfect on the HH rubric that those candidates fill most interview slots. That only leaves a handful of spots for 3.7s GPAs, or semi-targets, or mid-tier banking groups.
There may be 25 UMM funds. Some candidates that score near perfect will land in these funds - maybe they wanted a direct promotion opportunity, maybe they got the offer the first day and took it. A 3.7 semi-target at BAML is an acceptable profile, but it certainly is not above average.
Re-orient your brain for what is good enough, as you now have a new comp set. People will say that a 3.7 is the cutoff for banking. There are 5x as many investment banking analysts as there are UMM/MF PE spots. Your entire competition now has BB / EB banking, 3.5+ GPAs. Top PE firms can, and will, be selective enough to differentiate between a 3.7 and a 3.9, and between Boston College and Wharton. You have no actual work experience yet, and they have limited resources to conduct interviews.
It's your choice on how to allocate your time. If you have a 3.6 from a semi-target and want UMM / MF interviews, you better believe that having a 780 GMAT will help your resume. Maybe you decide an extra 2 points on your HH rubric isn't worth it because you think the time is better spent elsewhere, or maybe you aren't sure you can get a 750+ in the first place. It's not a decision someone on WSO can make for you.
This is less relevant in the MM, where having a solid banking group alone is sufficient at most places. There are just more seats in MM PE.
But for the love of god, please no more of the "my profile is x y z, should I take the GMAT or try to improve my GPA."