Take London PE job or move to the U.S. on secondment with current bank?
I have recently been offered an associate role in London at a UMM PE firm, but have also recently been offered the chance to spend 1-2 years working in the U.S. upon associate promotion at my BB bank this summer (either NYC or SF, but leaning towards NYC).
Whilst I have always wanted to spend a few years in the states, having lived and grown up in Europe / London my whole life, I do not want to stay in banking long-term.
Would appreciate any advice on whether I should delay moving to the buyside for this opportunity. My instinct is that I should turn down my PE offer and re-recruit in 1-2 years after, however I am concerned that I am essentially giving up on two years of career progression (given I would likely come in at the same junior associate position when I eventually get a PE job in Europe).
Any advice would be much appreciated as I need to either accept my offer or commit to moving to the U.S. in the next few weeks.
Interesting, following
I think there's a few things you have to consider here. Overall, I am not finding a single reason why you should take the Associate promo offer if you don't see yourself in banking long term, other than if there is a meaningful promo bonus (>50k USD IMO) that could entice you to stay in your current bank. Absent that information, I 100% think you should take the UK PE gig, you will likely accelerate your career and still have the option to do PE in the US later if you so wish.
1. You don't see yourself staying in banking long term - this is a good enough reason to move to PE sooner than later. If you've done the two years working as an Analyst at a BB, you are well past the learning curve and the associate promo will not give you that much growth compared to what you've already seen. The first 6-8 months of PE will definitely be challenging but all the more rewarding. Do not expect to work less or to coast in PE, PE is a grind, but rewards you with more ownership over the work product, more ownership of your time, and more interesting work in general.
2. European Finance Culture is very different from the US - From what I understand, European finance culture is more laid back than US work culture, you will definitely have a harder time in the US unplugging during vacation, leaving earlier at night, and the personalities of the people you work with are infinitely more challenging. I personally found my friends who went to finance in Europe actually became a lot more interesting, while my US friends (and I) mostly burnt out. I guess the ease of being able to travel throughout Europe on a banking salary with some more vacation flexibility helps keep some level of normalcy.
3. You will still be starting from scratch in the US - While you did 2 years already at your current bank, you're not avoiding the period where people don't trust you/you still have to prove yourself, similar to starting a new job, so why stick with your current bank? You can probably recruit and get an Associate role at any other bank, and the experience is likely similar. I am real believer that there is really no point in loyalty to investment banks at the junior level, especially if you're moving across the ocean where you have to start from scratch anyways.
4. US work experience is considered superior in general - On the flip side, this could be the opportunity for you to jump across the continent and pick up some US experience, which to your point, is really helpful for your resume. You can use this to pivot to a US Fund within 1-2 years, and now you have US PE experience. My only question is - why can't you do the same jump after having spent 1-2 years in PE in the UK? I am very confident that US funds will appreciate 2 years of banking + 2 years of UMM PE in the UK more than 3-4 years of BB (even if 2 in the uS), so if you have the opportunity to go leave banking now, and that still opens doors for US funds in the future (where you can get that US work experience you've always wanted), why not just take the UK PE role now?
Thank you for the detailed response, really helpful.
Whilst I agree that my learning had plateaued and I would see more immediate skills upside from moving to PE, over a 30+ year career does delaying the start of a move to the buyside actually matter in the long run? If I don't view my career as a race against other peers my age, I think I can get comfortable with this (although easier said than done...)
On pivoting to the US down the road, I have heard how difficult it can be to make the move not through an existing employer. It seems like a risk to assume I can land a new US PE fund who are willing to sponsor a visa given the surplus of other strong US candidates who don't have this issue.
Completely agree with your 2nd and 3rd points. Definitely something that is keeping me on the fence as I am concerned I would move to the U.S. and have no ability to actually enjoy my time there.
Agreed with your points, I (like most of my peers) seem to think the 2+2 route is the 11th commandment, but it really does not matter over a 30-year career. That comes down to personal preference. I think A2A is somewhat of a victory lap having been in the trenches for so long that the work generally comes a lot easier to you. You will run circles around MBA associates and command more respect from your seniors anyways (which, partially lessons the impact of the 3rd point). In my journey, I didn't really take this victory lap, because I didn't find the work meaningful enough to warrant wasting more of my youth on it. On a macro point, I am also not a financier for life, so I'd rather get all of it done with (including PE) sooner than later. This goes back to point #1, if you don't see yourself in it long-term, I wouldn't waste another second in it unless there is meaningful upside from staying.
Visa is definitely an important aspect, not a lot of employers sponsor H1Bs/etc. I know a lot of people that may make move solely to get H1B sponsorship/work towards a green card. Having said that, you mentioned you only wanted to spend a few years in the US (as opposed to a long-term career), so perhaps a temp visa might work? I am Canadian so I use a TN but not sure what the UK equivalent would be. A lot of employers will be okay "sponsoring" a temp visa (but its not really sponsoring, just minimal legal work which they outsource).
Two good reasons to take associate role in US (1) if you want to take the 1 year victory lap (2) if you want long-term H1B visa sponsorship.
There is no UK equivalent for the TN visa. TN is a result of the NAFTA trade agreement and a similar agreement does not exist between the US and the UK. It's really hard to go to the US if you're not Canadian.
I'll take any day 2 years of relevant experience in another continent than banking 2.0 in the same city.
Not really following - you would rather take 2 more years of banking 1.0 in another continent vs banking 2.0 in the same city? if this comment is just an aversion to PE in general, it's really not helpful given OP isn't planning on staying in banking long-term, and has expressed they would like to try something new. The locational point is valid, however.
No aversion to PE, it's just that such opportunities don't come as often as OP thinks meanwhile buy-side gigs do come, so I'd prioritize what's "rare" instead of what's more common. In other words, it's a matter of life experience vs. career progression, and I personally found that when one reasonably prioritizes the 1st it often indirectly influences for the good the 2nd.
OP decision may also depend on how he sees his life: live to work vs. work to live. To give an example, I look at my life as 'work to live', so because of that, I used my career as a means to move and live for some periods abroad just for the sake of experiencing new cultures and practice foreign languages, but that's also because I'm a huge advocate of the educational impact of traveling/seeing the world. Others, on the contrary, may have a different set of priorities that may be incompatible w/ moving abroad i.e. building a local network in his region, so they may take any day the PE offer than moving to the States.
I think that's a fair point, I moved to PE in the states from banking in Canada for the exact same reason, wanted more life experience in general and I get to see a new place. Having moved here however, I really think that banking in the states is not the best place to "work to live", as US finance culture is generally a lot more challenging to my previous point. I.e. I haven't take vacation in a year (that is slightly firm specific, but does speak to finance culture in US at large). Not because I can't, but because it wouldn't be respected much.
I imagine (this is anecdotal) a UK PE gig will likely afford more opportunities to "work to live" given more focus on WLB on that side of the world, and the fact that it is just not banking. NY finance culture is easily 2am's in the office on a regular, and your weekends blown up on a regular basis. That is not the case in PE as often as it is in banking, as you have more ownership over your time in general. WFH culture is also more prominent in Europe, whereas, almost every bank in America is back in the office at least a few days a week. Now, I don't know anything about OPs PE offer in the UK, but if its at least 2 days WFH, you bet I would be spending long weekends working in Barcelona/Croatia/Greece. That's just not possible in America with the way things are right now.
How would you compare the difference in culture between IB in Canada vs PE in US based on your experience? Thinking of making a similar move but in a group with decent enough culture.
To add some more Qs:
- Do you find hours better both in total # of hours and control and ability to predict your hours?
- Is there as much facetime in US PE as in banking in general?
- do you get a lot of fire drills and last minute and irrational requests from seniors in PE?
- How does work intensity and deal velocity compare?
I was in your exact shoes about 4 years ago and decided to move over from London to the US with my banking job. Overall one of the best decisions of my life. New York is such a fun city to live in and the chances that your PE fund would offer a similar move is very slim. PE will still exist after another year and if you are lucky you will be able to recruit for roles in the US (although the visa does indeed make it more challenging). Whilst you might get penalized a year or two in terms of progression, your career is very long and an experience like this can change your entire life trajectory in many ways.
WLB honestly doesn't differ that much between the two. You will be working hard if you are on deals in either place. Vacation also isn't as frowned upon as some commenters here make it seem.
Feel free to reach out if you have any questions!
You think nyc is more fun than London? Why?
These are just my perspectives but generally I found that people in New York are way more friendly / open to new friendships. Nightlife in New York (bars, clubs, raves) beats London by a margin in my view. The city is way smaller so easy to go everywhere by foot/subway/cab. Finally, if you are a dude, New York has a proportionally much higher level of single & hot girls. In London girls hate finance guys because they can just find old money / family money guys.
If you want to do PE, take the PE gig. Have a lot of friends who went to NY for their rotation, and none of them made it to PE, because they missed the recruiting window altogether. Hiring someone with four years of experience in PE is becoming increasingly rare. While PE funds in Europe haven’t reverted to the absurd hiring practices of their US counterparts, it is trending that way.
Now, if you’re a girl, you’ll be fine, and you can go to NY and come back, or even try PE in NY.
However, if you’re a guy and you don’t have a US passport your chances of being recruited by a US fund are very slim. Firstly, visa issues, secondly, people will second guess your long-term commitment to the US.
We were 5 people in my "rotating class" from a large BB from London to New York. 3 years later, 2 of us moved to PE in New York, 2 moved to PE in Europe, and 1 stayed with the bank. A lot of funds in Europe are fine hiring from banks even at VP / Director level without much penalizing effect. Look at Permira, Astorg, PAI, EQT, Nordic, and many others
Cum quis et explicabo ut. Sint nihil a reiciendis molestiae ea. Blanditiis pariatur veniam facere. Labore ducimus praesentium repellat quo. Rerum a est sequi sint pariatur non. Doloribus voluptates perferendis sed sed.
Dolorum et impedit eos voluptate assumenda rem numquam suscipit. In culpa tempore dignissimos reprehenderit. Tempora quod cum quod delectus et quasi. Et laboriosam autem saepe iure. Similique unde sed corporis maiores maxime quia in.
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...