PE is incredibly boring. Is HF the answer?
2nd year associate at a UMM. Well liked with good path to VP. Hours are reasonable (~60/week outside of deal sprints). Fund has decent trajectory. On paper, I should be very happy.
But I’m incredibly bored.
At least at my fund, the vast majority of actual investment discretion and critical thinking is concentrated at the Partner / Principal level. VPs and below are mostly executing. Whether it’s live deals or portfolio work, it’s ERP implementations, management incentive plans, tax distributions, compliance certs, diligence packs, legal diligence, quarterly valuations, financing workstreams, etc. Hearing these words make me yawn. I don't feel like an investor.
I’m sure others have been in this spot. I know the consensus view: PE is a better job than HF on a risk-adjusted basis. More stability, clearer path, strong long-term economics. But I’m starting to question that matters if you’re just consistently bored at work.
For people who left for HF — did it actually fix the boredom? Is the work meaningfully more engaging?
For people who stayed — was it worth it to keep zapping your brain for the money and long-term economics?
Grass is always greener - didn’t you say at the levels above you, there’s real interest?
If so, if you’re on a good path, making good money, and not killing yourself, why give up a good thing and not just wait until you get there to see yourself?
If you left for a HF you might wonder what if you’d just held out a few more years to get there. I don’t know dynamics of lateraling to HF once you’re more senior in PE, but I cant help but think your improved knowledge base isn’t an asset.
Yes HF is definitely more engaging / feels more like investing since you're not as bogged down by many mindless process workstreams / portco reporting, but honestly from your description it sounds like you have a pretty solid setup. You don't have to worry each day about your positions suddenly blowing up and being out of a job, which is a pretty rough position in the economy right now. I'd stick it out in PE if you think you will get the VP promo unless you absolutely have a passion for public investing and would do it even for a haircut in comp
I don't have a "passion" for public investing. I track the market and find hedge fund guys super interesting on podcasts, but I've never invested in stuff outside of ETFs (mostly bc of the compliance obstacle).
Do you love your job, or is the stress the overwhelming emotion?
Yeah know what you mean.
There is a lot of drudgery and process and admin.
Although if I were you, I’d try get some carry and have enough to just run my own book on public markets.
How involved do you have to get on nitty gritty crap like PortCo integrations and stuff? Agree fully with valuations, quarterly reporting and that yawn fest.
Also not a huge fan of board meeting week. Maybe you have less in the US
I've personally never worked at a HF but have frequently fantasized about it. Given you're in PE, my guess is that you want to do something that is fundamental in nature (probably with a reasonably long hold period) - based on what I can tell, those seats pretty much don't exist anymore outside of a very small handful of solid Single Manager names that almost never hire. Otherwise, most of the HF jobs are with much shorter-term orientation (even if they are still doing fundamental analysis to support their short-term moves).
But just operating under the assumption that you are interested in more of that SM type role I mentioned - I HIGHLY encourage you to try and write a stock pitch, even just for some names that you're personally interested in investing in. What you'll quickly realize is that there is a different sort of "drudgery" - in PE, you don't have to go on treasure hunts to cobble together the information you need to make an investing decision, it's given to you when you ask diligence questions. Yes, you need to dig through the data room, but it isn't the same. In public markets, you have to rely on public filings that are in some ways intentionally obfuscatory, and then you have to try and figure out what the market is actually pricing into the name, and then you have to figure out a catalyst for why that's going to change. As a PE guy, I can tell you right now, we have NO training in thinking about catalysts. When you really get down to it, we're essentially just trying to arbitrage growth rate vs. entry multiple, but if you go into a HF PM's office with that thesis, my sense is that you'll get laughed out of the room.
Would be curious for actual HF people to weigh in, but that's my general take on the situation.
I agree... scaled SMs that can truly take LT bets/have the quasi permanent capital to do so are a far and few in between and hire when they want to (pershing sq is one, D1 another... but you can argue if those are truly great seats, some of the boston scaled SMs, elliott, multi-bn FOs, etc.) ... optimizing your path to recruit at these funds is not a good plan as you essentially need to be at the right place in the right time.
Most of your other scaled multi-bn SMs don't have that luxury of having patient capital anymore given MM outperformance over the past few years and either have key man risk from the star CIO / are banking on their glory from the past (look no further than baupost).
The top tier LOs (the cap groups/fidelity/wellingtons of the world) don't hire out of PE unless you do an MBA.
MMs just play a different game given tight risk limits, but that doesn't mean they are "bad" seats to learn how to invest... I mean look at the performance and payouts over the past few years. You just need different risk tolerance and lucky enough to land the right pod. I work at one of the above seats, not an MM so maybe someone from an MM can chime in more here.
You will have a steep learning curve regardless of the seat you go to, so just because you work in PE doesn't necessarily mean you're better off at an SM vs. MM. Your first few years (and I think career trajectory) will be shaped by the PM you work under... so instead of chasing prestige, you need to find the right PM to work under (even more important at an MM). So speak to people at different funds, get a sense of what exactly you want to do, and then decide whether HF is truly the right seat for you. Yes, your simple multiple expansion will get laughed out, but that doesn't mean you can't learn to think about what and how to pitch. You'd be surprised as how much you can learn under the right person.
"optimizing your path to recruit at these funds is not a good plan as you essentially need to be at the right place in the right time."
Can you expand on this? Not enough seats so don't even try unless you're harvard / BXPE ?
If there's a few of these scaled SMs that have been able to sustain institutionally, why aren't there others? Suggests these are the remaining few that have been the luckiest?
Helpful response, thanks
I only ever heard about psychopathic backstabbing (especially during economic downturns) and stress beyond belief in HFs. I could be wrong, but to hear someone prefer that over a relatively stable, prestigious and high-paying job with good career progression sounds like insanity to me.
Now my impression could just be as skewed as yours or anyone elses on this forum (with the exception of people who work in that particular field), but I generally recommend looking for excitement outside of the workplace first. Maybe consider speaking to a counsellor to sort out any other cause for your dissatisfaction. I would advise against making any rash decisions since you can still try to make the switch being one or two steps higher on the ladder.
I'm obviously biased towards PE, so take lightly, but a few more considerations for public investing:
- More individual (vs. team-based) work --> I'm an extrovert who generally enjoys teamwork, but the personalities in PE (extreme neuroticism, even compared to IB) makes me lean more individual
- Positions are marked-to-market every day --> I see the objective downsides to this but part of me wonders if I would appreciate how that would cut through the bullshit of quarterly valuations / fundraising BS
But all interesting points, thanks
I’m in a very similar position and also considering a move to a hedge fund. I completely understand your point that PE feels less like “investing” and more like structured diligence box checking and administrative work. I am also really struggling with the extreme formality of IC discussions and overall hierarchy but perhaps that’s not industry specific.
One thing I’m still trying to think through is the long-term impact AI could have on each path.
On one hand, AI likely increases efficiency in public markets as the cost of processing and synthesizing information continues to fall. If everyone has better tools, does that compress edge?
On the other hand, in private equity I could see a lot of the administrative and diligence-heavy work becoming automated, while the core elements (sourcing, structuring, judgment, and governance) remain differentiated. Also think the structural inefficiency of private markets (and the fact that you can’t just buy a private equity index fund / ETF) may help preserve economics.
Interested in anyone has thoughts here?
How about just doing your job and collecting the money and then you can do whatever the hell you want later
I am in the exact same position and have the same thoughts. Are you US or Europe based?
Ignore title - am VP
NYC
Unless it’s a genuinely good seat (scaled SM, top team at C/M/B/P) I’d stay in PE. You’ll be starting at the same learning curve as someone coming out of school and have to sludge through publics
Agree feel the same away. Ignore title - have 3Y in MF PE.
I get making money and it’s a good job but to have gone through top education and work experience to get here, it does feel like a waste of or uninspiring life.
The best part about the transition, in my opinion, is being able to deploy my money and get direct feedback from the market as I develop as an investment professional. Yes a lot of luck is involved in investing and randomness is part of it, but instead of waiting until you're 40 years old and a Managing Director at PE firm to uncover whether or not you have what it takes to do good deals / invest capital, you can find out your aptitude much quicker at a HF. Even if I'm not the PM of my firm, my investment decisions still receive feedback (from my PM and the market).
Looking back it, my MDs in PE were not good investors. I'm still much younger than the MDs I worked for, but after a few years at a HF, I would argue I have more investing "reps" than all the MDs combined. They were just good at negotiating, networking, and were very hardworking. In essence, they loved doing deals. At a hedge fund, you have to love solving puzzles. In publics, the harder you work on something does not necessarily mean you will be rewarded as in other industries (PE), so it's also a very humbling experience from that sense whereas in PE you won't get humbled until you own the risk for doing a deal and its outcome.
I think you hit the nail with the puzzle solving point. There are multiple ways to make money and is not just use of leverage and identifying industry or macro trends (some optimization port co work) like PE is. HF feels to me like the wild west - high risk high reward. It's exhilirating but can cost you your job on a downturn. The road to riches is not a straight line!
What kind of hedge fund did you pivot to post PE? Where are you now?
L/S SM
And to play devil's advocate on myself. I miss the "ownership" feeling of PE where you had more control. Public investing is extremely passive with a goal of being right ~60% of the time. You no longer have influence, control, or are in the weeds with companies and management teams as I was in PE. HF job is mostly reading, thinking, and putting together a puzzle which I then spit out into my model. And conversations with management teams are all filtered nonsense, whereas in PE conversations with portcos are completely different - i.e., making a decision on strategy, pricing, etc...Hopefully helps others think through what energizes them.
bump.
I went from MF PE to working at one of the big SMs and here are my thoughts after several years. Very happy with the transition but trying to be brutally honest on both good and bad
Pros
Comp. Me (and my peers at other similar funds) are making 3-6x (with upper bounds in the 10-20x range) what we would be making in PE. The long term career is harder to underwrite though so that’s the offset
Cons
Hours. Again this might be firm dependent but hours for our team (and lots of other peer funds) is not any better than PE. The difference is that it’s a lot more predictable and self inflicted because you choose how much or how little work to spend on a name. Not unusual for people on our team to work 6-7 days a week. Also to the point above it’s impossible to really unplug - there’s no dead period you get between deals in PE
Am with MF PE for 4-5y - have a few specific questions, do you mind DMing me? Would much appreciate your help.
Can you just post them here?
This is incredibly helpful, thanks
The peak exit is to move to a LCOL country once you reach your desired/necessary net worth and chill for the rest of your life playing GTA VI, not a HF.
I have considered it but I want kids (in 5-10 years)
And NYC dating / nightlife is so easy. I think a lot of ppl who go that route aren't getting laid enough in the states
Then just move to Texas or something you’ll be fine.
Praesentium molestiae voluptatem velit nulla consectetur eum in. Sunt velit nam quia cupiditate dolorum. Quidem repellendus dolore ea qui nisi quam sed numquam. Ad non dolorem voluptate porro velit sunt cupiditate. Rem voluptas sunt aperiam voluptate cupiditate saepe.
Et distinctio dolor at totam quidem. Facilis consectetur corrupti maxime et consectetur eveniet similique ut. Voluptas est architecto odio sed illo.
Blanditiis quaerat quaerat natus sit. Ab a exercitationem et a qui sint officiis. Et odio ad velit non ex voluptatem. Sint corporis odio ut vel quasi.
Est blanditiis perspiciatis saepe minus aut incidunt quas fuga. Dignissimos in reprehenderit eveniet iure magnam quis qui. Qui id autem sint accusamus ad unde autem. Et voluptates fugiat fugiat et nulla voluptatem.
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...
Suscipit repudiandae qui labore distinctio. Modi voluptatem ut porro consequuntur. Et quas expedita incidunt nostrum voluptatem maxime ut nihil.
Error nisi sint aspernatur minus. Voluptatem tempore quibusdam laborum. Est alias maiores ex. Voluptates commodi illo necessitatibus aperiam consequatur eveniet maiores.