Return Full-Time to EB vs. Lindsay Goldberg FT Analyst
I am likely going to get a return offer for my top bb/eb barring anything unexpected and have received an offer to join LG as a FT analyst. I know almost nothing about the firm coming from a school w/ very few alumni and would appreciate any thoughts. Headhunters are looking at me for a check. The LG team isn't going to be honest w/ my concerns, and I can't exactly speak to my IB analysts. Here are my personal pros/ cons but I would really appreciate what others have to say!
Stay in Banking:
PE will always be there and will have many more opportunities to join firms like LG. Given I have performed well I don't think I will have an immense struggle w/ placing Analyst class - think I'll be lonely when LG only takes 2 analysts Find the work interesting at the higher level - could see myself staying on esp as PE economics get worse Maybe use this for group placement leverage after getting an RO?
Leave for LG:
Just increased fund size by ~45% (3.4 --> 4.9bn), room to grow and get carry in the long-runVery small headcount (~20-25 investors, 2 analysts) which likely means lots of responsibility and interaction with seniors Opportunity to actually think from right out of collegeStrong B-School and public mkts investing placements1 yr analyst program --> promote to 2 years as an associate
Cons of LG:
2nd time they're running an analyst program - concerned about training vs. IB. Way less deal reps and volume. Also 0 data points on how they're using their analysts as they've just started.I do think this is mitigated by AI helping you ramp much quicker + having just raised an new fund to deploy capital but I'm concerned that I won't be entrusted with any modeling workstreams and would be behind my associate peers Fund mandate also doesn't lend itself to technical skillfocused on founder owned businesses, likely way more thinking on the market & industry but a lot less in the model -> might be a negative should I want to join a publics seat later Performing well in these interviews suggest I might go to a "better" firm should I recruit on-cycle? Not sure abt this point though – trading a winning lotto ticket for an unknown Significantly less friends (college buddies are not going to be in NYC)
Any thoughts or comments on LG and my decisions would be very appreciated.
Based on the most helpful WSO content, here’s a breakdown of your situation and considerations:
Staying in Banking (EB)
Pros: 1. Broader Exit Opportunities: Staying in banking keeps the door open for a wider range of PE firms, including potentially more prestigious ones than LG. PE recruiting is highly structured, and having a strong EB brand on your resume will position you well for on-cycle recruiting. 2. Deal Experience: EBs typically offer more deal reps and technical modeling experience, which are critical for PE recruiting and long-term career development. 3. Optionality: If you’re unsure about PE long-term, staying in banking allows you to explore other paths like corporate development, VC, or even staying in banking for A2A promotion. 4. Networking and Class Cohesion: Larger analyst classes provide a built-in network and camaraderie, which can be valuable both professionally and personally.
Cons: 1. Lifestyle: Banking hours can be grueling, and the EB environment may not offer the same level of work-life balance as LG. 2. Delayed PE Entry: If your ultimate goal is PE, staying in banking delays your entry into the buy-side by at least a year or two.
Joining Lindsay Goldberg (LG)
Pros: 1. Small Team, High Exposure: With only 2 analysts and a small team overall, you’re likely to get significant exposure to senior professionals and potentially more responsibility early on. 2. Fund Growth: The recent fund size increase suggests growth and potential for long-term career development, including carry opportunities if you stay. 3. Unique Experience: LG’s focus on founder-owned businesses and strategic thinking could differentiate you from peers with more traditional PE or banking backgrounds. 4. B-School and Public Markets Placement: Strong placements into top MBA programs and public markets roles could provide a safety net if you decide to pivot later.
Cons: 1. Limited Training: As a relatively new analyst program, LG may not have the structured training and development resources that EBs offer. This could leave you less prepared for future roles, especially if you want to pivot to another PE firm or public markets. 2. Fewer Deal Reps: Lower deal volume and a focus on qualitative analysis over technical modeling could hinder your development of hard skills, which are critical for future PE or public markets roles. 3. Loneliness: With only 2 analysts and fewer peers, you might feel isolated, especially if your college friends aren’t in NYC. 4. Uncertainty: As a newer program, there’s limited data on how LG utilizes analysts and what their long-term career trajectories look like.
Key Considerations
Recommendation
If you’re unsure about PE long-term or value optionality, staying in banking at your EB is the safer choice. It provides better training, broader exit opportunities, and a stronger network. However, if you’re confident in LG’s trajectory and excited about the opportunity to work closely with senior professionals in a growing fund, it could be a unique and rewarding experience.
Sources: https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forum/investment-banking/qa-md-in-ma-and-capital-markets-with-bulge-bracket-and-boutique-experience?customgpt=1, Lazard vs. Morgan Stanley?, Which EB place best into PE?, The Case for Elite Boutiques over any Bulge Brackets in 2022,
In a similar situation - let us know what you decide!
Same here!
Did you receive an offer?
It looks like there r more than 2 analysts then
PE and don’t look back
Ignore title- I’m a former analyst at a competitor.
Let me talk about a few of your concerns first and then come to what I did. You mentioned loneliness, and it’s true. Analyst classes are small. But associates in PE can be fun to be around, and honestly, they older-sibling you into some things like financial planning. Maybe these places are a bit more buttoned up, but ultimately, it varies firm to firm. If you’re in NYC, you’ll still have friends outside of work.
The other concern is how new the program is. Frankly I’d be a little worried, too, but I do have some thoughts to comfort you. Don’t take my word for it. First, it’s not like this is a first-time LMM firm. Firms the size of LG are taking analysts because it’s a talent war, and they want to capture talent early. No big PE firm fires analysts 2-and-out, because you were hired to be associate candidates. I wouldn’t worry about whether you won’t do any real work, I would be thinking about whether you can handle real work, because it is HARD… developing excel and ppt skills while running IC decks means you’ll get cooked early on (not bad at all, just know what you’re signing up for).
Finally, your identity is likely very visible to the firm, so be careful. Only a handful of people must be in the same exact spot as you.
Now onto whether you should take it, I can only give you my decision tree:
Is this PE job hard to get?
I wouldn’t say “PE will always be there,” the jobs are hard to land and you have less control than you think. If you get cooked at work during on-cycle, what then? LG is one of those firms that top bankers compete for year after year. That was reason #1 why I took my offer.
Do you actually wanna do PE in 2 years?
I wouldn’t say PE closes any doors that IB does, exiting from a PE analyst program to corp fin is maybe a less well-trodden path but obviously doable. The real question is, if you don’t know what you want to do, and you enjoyed your summer, I’d rather have bird in hand than two in bush. I knew I wanted to be an investor right away. That was reason #2 I took my offer.
Edit: Analyst to associate in one year??????? If this is accurate, it is insane. Have never heard of that. What an offer!
have seen a few places do this. Audax in boston does this.
For the kid, I would honestly still choose an EB. You are still young and an EB gives you great training to do everything in the corporate world. You don't know how things shape out- you might not really enjoy finance and prefer to be in a corp dev role or strategy.
LG is a great firm and I think they are very sharp people, but if you are at an EB and judging from your thinking process here, you seem like the type to be able to snag some sort of megafund variant in 2 years. If this were a KKR or Warburg type fund then the choice might lean towards them, but an EB vs LG, I would skew slightly to EB.
Also worth mentioning is the class of people you will meet- you will have a great network from which you can get intros at other funds etc. instead of being just the 2 young ones at a fund.
LG is a very solid firm and has done relatively well, but it's still a JAMMBO. They're also old and, like most of the older UMMs, pretty overstaffed at the mid-level relatively to younger firms. There are certainly worse UMM seats out there, but LG's growing fund size isn't necessarily going to be the same avenue for a long-term career as Arcline or another younger firm that's scaling rapidly. Keep in mind: LG went from a $4.7bn Fund III in 2008 to a $4.9bn fund today, and it was a slow raise that started in 2023 with a 2026 close, so it's not all that impressive.
It's a fine PE seat, but it sits somewhere in the middle: if you want a growing firm where you can build a long-term career, go somewhere younger that's scaling faster (just go and look up new 2025/2026 fund raises and look at firm trajectories); if you're just chasing prestige for the sake of b-school or Hedge Funds, there are plenty of better names out there. Honestly, I'd strongly recommend taking the EB offer, figuring out what you actually want to do in PE, if PE at all, and going from there.
Hypothetically if this was the mandate you interested in, how would you think about it? Thank you!
I would still not take it because JAMMBOs all have no differentiation or edge, and thus are not good PE firms to join if you want to stay in PE for more than a few years. I would think long and hard about joining any declining fund or JAMMBO.
Go to the EB (trust me)
Is the process over or are they still hiring
You’d be surprised at how similar the work will be. If you liked your bank and group, I’d stay there, as you’ll have a wider range of exits if you get two years in and decide you want to go to a hedge fund / startup / corp dev, and you’ll get a way better pace of deals and experience, structured training, and a bigger / more friendly analyst class.
If you hated banking and want to be on the “investment” side (in quotes bc at the junior level esp as an analyst it’s the same bs PowerPoint and excel work either way) and want to do consumer buyouts for the next several years of your life, go to LG, it’s a great fund and you’ll probably have better hours.
Source: interned at top BB and an MF, learned more in PE but both were boring so I went to publics
If you dont pick the EB you might be retarded
EB would provide much more consistent training outcomes versus an untested analyst program at a JAMMBO. PE firms struggle to even give associates consistent training and deal experience, let alone analysts.
Qui officiis tempore repellat in modi. Et consequuntur maxime perferendis aut debitis autem eum veniam. Iure quisquam et tenetur neque eum rerum. Quo facilis dolores inventore soluta quae voluptate dolor possimus. Unde nemo harum dolorem sapiente saepe nisi.
Reiciendis quibusdam delectus nihil voluptatem molestiae earum. Quasi commodi eum nesciunt est. Neque non officia beatae voluptate exercitationem voluptas.
Quidem rerum odio omnis quia sunt dolorem. Id quas neque est ducimus nesciunt et sunt. Deserunt fugit pariatur consequatur necessitatibus possimus cupiditate. Dolore voluptates aut optio debitis quo.
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...