SWF (GIC, Temasek, Mubadala) in NY
Anyone got insights on direct investment arms of SWFs with NY offices? What type of work are they doing and how do they compare with MM/UMM PE?
Trending Content - Private Equity Forum
Career Resources
bump
Mubadala is only coinvest and FoF. Dumb money, effectively.
GIC is only coinvest and FoF, but also has separate strategies like VC, publics, and Credit that do directs. Good backgrounds. Heard good things about comp, bad things about lifestyle.
Temasek isn't a SWF. It can do majority and minority, but NYC is mostly consumer and some tech for those teams. Effectively PE/GE. No idea on comp but heard lifestyle can be sweaty. Also has separate teams for FoF and Coinvest but those are probably a level below GIC.
That might have been the case ~10 years ago. Nowadays the more active SWFs, such as Temasek/Mubadala, are acting as "traditional" private equity firms
This is just wrong. Firstly, Temasek is actually a SWF. Secondly, Mubadala is very active in North America, focusing mostly on direct investments across various industries (control & non-control). I don't think any of these SWFs do FoF investments in North America - They have their local offices for that (UAE or Singapore)
GIC is a sweatshop (for SWFs), friend previously worked there
Not entirely correct:
Mubadala - their NY office focuses mostly on majority and minority (co-invest) direct equity strategies. FoF investments are made mostly out of Abu Dhabi. Note that they heavily expanded their NY team over the last 2-3 years, hiring from a bunch of GE/UMM PE (Summit, HIG, EQT, Point72 etc)
GIC - frankly, they have a number of investment strategies in the US, ranging from direct pe, growth equity, credit, etc. Know less about them
Temasek - it's actually a SWF. Compared to GIC, it does more direct investments (majority and minority stakes) similarly to Mubadala. Main sector focus is on tech and consumer
How sophisticated is Mubadala compared to the others? I've seen them writing checks alongside MF sponsors but they seemed to be passive. Separately do you know anything about PIF in NYC?
I'd say the split of their work between control (more active) vs co-invest (more passive) is around 50/50. They expanded heavily in the US since 2021. So for their more active positions, they'd usually source and lead the deal, doing diligence, getting board seats etc. They also have a dedicated operating team that handles the implementation aspect at the portco level.
Not too sure about PIF's presence in the US, but I wouldn't be surprised if they will follow Mubadala/Temasek/GIC and become more active in North America.
The Mubadala Capital business (direct PE) has a mixed track record but they seem to be focused on fixing it and attempting to raise more 3rd party capital.
Anyone have any ideas on Comp for these guys? Have heard it's similar to MM PE cash comp with no carry, but is this true for most of the places mentioned?
comp is more or less the same as MM/UMM PE (but lower than some MFs) but you have no carry given the structure of these places. Bonuses are pretty good from what I hear and you obviously don't work yourself to death
Out of the SWFs, I'd say that Temasek and Mubadala (eg recent Fortress deal) are the only ones that are the closest to traditional buyout PE in the way they invest/operate. Other SWFs are more passive in nature
Do any of these have Infra teams?
not in the US
Incorrect, GIC has a strong infra team (in comparison to the other names listed above)
What does associate / senior associate comp look like on direct investing teams in NY?
Starting salary for associates is in line with that for IB... not sure about bonuses etc
Depends on group, but GIC pays above market average but below top tier. HR literally targets 75th percentile of market. So strong, but not in line with likes of MF.
WLB also depends heavily on group. RE, ISG, Infra can get pretty sweaty.
Any of these SWF hire FT analyst out of undergrad?
Any precedents of post-mba IB Asos breaking into the firm?
Mubadala and GIC are the most active SWFs for direct investments by deal count and both have dedicated NY teams. I can't speak much to Temasek but they seem to have investment professionals in NY and I would say they are a step down from Mubadala and GIC just from a pure activeness standpoint.
Mubadala and GIC both have completely isolated Direct Investments Groups so these teams are exclusively working on directs, no fund of funds work. Both will say they split their time 50/50 between lead direct and co-direct from a day-to-day perspective but I would say most of the actual closed investments are going to be co-direct with another GP leading. They think like any other direct investor would from an investment merit perspective but in terms of exposure to an asset and portfolio company they are a step removed from what you would see in a traditional GP direct investment Associate role. Some will like this style since less grunt work but if you want thorough all-hands experience then you are better off sticking with the traditional GP direct roles where you have to always lead the diligence efforts.
Comparing to MM/UMM PE depends on what you are really looking for. Compensation is going to be about the same for both at the Associate level since neither will offer carry and SWFs will pay lower than MF PE but still competitive with the next tier down. If you have a path to promotion for either then would say the MM/UMM PE path will pay more in the long run if you are at a high performing fund since you will participate in carry. If you want exposure to mega-fund-type transactions then SWF PE will give you that since these teams like to deploy massive equity checks of say $500M into one investment and if they are participating in a co-direct then the lead GP will match or write a bigger equity check so naturally you will end up investing in multi-billion dollar transactions but of course the exposure will be to a lesser extent since the Associate at the lead GP will drive.
Temasek and Mubadala both can and do do their “own deals” - ie they can do a deal without a lead GP. Mubadala more recently with Zelis, and Temasek with a number of their growth and recap deals (they’re probably the most active “true direct” investor). Temasek’s mandate is close to a crossover/growth buyout fund with sector specialties.
Mubadala’s current mandate is to grow in the US via splashy counderwrites and recaps, with less focus on returns. But, on a pure # of deals basis Temasek and Mubadala do fewer deals than GIC.
GIC’s mandate is that of a fund investor who puts coinvest capital into a ton of GP deals in order to reduce their blended average fees paid. Their DI strategy exists to support this mandate.
Across their directs teams, Temasek is closest to a traditional PE/growth/crossover (industry teams also do public investments and VC/growth).
Mubadala in the middle - some large recaps, but the rest is coinvest…and they’re more focused on deployment than returns.
GIC is closest to a fund investor/coinvestor/allocator - their directs strategy exists to blend down their fees paid to their funds (counderwriting is fee-free), but they still think like investors and the guys have good pedigree. But no sourcing/primary execution like you would at the other two or true GPs.
Mubadala all NYC, Temasek split between SF NYC, GIC in NYC and some roles in SF. All good places but different mandates.
Source - at a buyout fund that works with one of these direct teams frequently and know the other DI teams well through friends. Also know sector heads across all three and have had chats from time to time over the last few years.
Can I PM? Have interview at Temasek/GIC this week and looking to understand more.
Can I PM? Would be very curious if this is a good place to do an associate gig
how is GIC's co-invest and funds group?
What about funds like MGX / 65EP? They are linked to sovereign wealth funds but standalone entities
bump
Quia dicta quasi corporis eligendi deleniti commodi. Quidem velit animi sint est ipsam minima est dolor. Quam nihil eos maiores et ut nulla.
Et nihil nostrum incidunt ut deleniti et autem. Alias accusantium et suscipit voluptatem et illum quisquam. Et occaecati explicabo tenetur omnis error aspernatur.
Vel impedit iure odio nisi. Fuga aspernatur ut amet occaecati laudantium libero quos.
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...
Quo quas magnam perferendis suscipit sapiente. Facilis quasi nulla doloribus. Aliquid ipsa excepturi eius incidunt quia.
Omnis quisquam aut veritatis in nemo quis. Et iusto eligendi reprehenderit eos illo voluptatum culpa eligendi. Voluptate unde autem occaecati in quo et inventore deleniti.
Quam deserunt sit quia eum a id. Qui sit porro voluptas voluptatem. Commodi ut eligendi occaecati. Asperiores voluptas tempore ipsum et consequatur. Ad dolore deserunt possimus. Eos iure amet voluptas. Voluptatem non cupiditate velit sit.
Doloremque soluta sed laboriosam incidunt voluptatem sint rerum. Et dolor rem quae. Quo cumque suscipit voluptates voluptatem sint aperiam architecto. Perspiciatis sunt maxime recusandae. Aut quo sit dicta.