Hot Take: On-Cycle Overweights the “Leftovers” from Target Schools

With the rise of PE analyst programs, many of the smartest and most strategic students at top schools are skipping banking altogether and going directly into top buy-side seats. The implication? The students who end up in IB at those same target schools are often the ones who didn’t prep early enough or weren’t sharp enough to land a PE analyst offer right out of undergrad.

A decade ago, going to a top target school → IBPE was a well-worn path. But that logic feels outdated in a world where top PE firms now pull directly from target schools (ex. Harvard, Wharton) for analyst roles. By the time on-cycle rolls around, the truly top candidates at those schools may already be off the table. Yet PE firms continue to prioritize target school resumes when selecting on-cycle candidates, even though these individuals may represent the "second wave" from their class.

Meanwhile, there are candidates from semi-targets or non-targets who didn’t have access to PE analyst pipelines out of undergrad, but still fought their way into top IB programs - the same ones that feed the megafunds. These are clearly high-caliber individuals, and arguably more battle-tested.

To be clear: this isn’t saying target kids aren’t smart or hard-working; they obviously are. But the idea that on-cycle interviewees represent the absolute best talent available is flawed, especially if headhunters filter primarily by school brand rather than actual banking performance.

Yes, I get that firms want to tell LPs “we only hire from Harvard and Wharton.” Yes, the volume of target school candidates at megafunds makes this self-reinforcing. But the current model is not optimized for merit, it’s optimized for pedigree of school. If anything, firms should be going deeper into the semi/non-target pool at top banks, because those are the candidates who couldn't go straight to PE, but proved themselves anyway. I understand they have limited data points this early, but I think school reputation is over-emphasized compared to bank, experience, leadership, etc. 

Curious to hear others' takes. Is the school prestige filter still valid, or is it just lazy sorting?

21 Comments
 

Did bro really take all that time to write a long ass essay on this…

Are you saying that PE is prestige and pedigree focused??? I’m shocked I tell you, shocked. No one has ever thought so deeply and profoundly. This post will go down in the historical cannons in the same way as Socrates or Aristotle.


Sorry you went to NYU but I don’t think that’s entirely why you aren’t getting girls 

 

I kinda get what you're saying and agree that the very top candidates are probably going to the buyside programs out of college

But don't think this is as incremental as you think - BX has like 6-7 spots a yr for Corp PE, maybe across Bain, Vista, WP etc. its like ~20 people.

That's prob not more than 15% of the aggregate MF class size

So maybe marginally deteriorates candidates across the tippy-top but i would argue that there's always been such an oversupply of qualified candidates for ~150 or so MF spots that it probably doesn't justify expanding the interview pool / changing how things have always been. I also suspect that the analyst classes at banks have gotten larger relative to a couple years ago and the bar continues to go up as college kids get more sweaty, so most of the seniors doing interviews don't notice a difference in candidate quality

 

BX is nepo/diversity, the top KKR industry groups hire 2-3 combined, and WP/Bain/Vista are T2 MFs. Tippy top candidates would rather shoot for APO/BX/KKR/H&F when they are guaranteed an interview

 

VERY nepo/diversity for WP/Bain/Vista as well, so wouldn’t even twist those as “standard hiring” for MF PE analysts:

Source: I am one of the above (ignore title lol).

 
Most Helpful

Two kinds of haughty bullshit here:

  1. The idea that all "top" kids at targets are going directly into top buyside seats. Yes, the "Silvers" (Lake and Point) are going to hire the top 1-2 Wharton grads every year (I think SLP actually canceled theirs, right)?. And the dandruff-eating market-obsessed types who have been obsessed with the public markets since 8th grade will likely prefer to go HF as soon as possible out of school. But the idea that idk the Vista Analyst spot is categorically more attractive than MS M&A for the magna/summa types is not in line with reality. For some, sure, but a lot of these people want the social aspect that comes from being in a larger "class" in banking, a lot of them over-index on being in New York specifically, and a lot of them just fare better in networking for banking spots (where there's ~10 top groups) than they do for the relatively few PE analyst programs. The difference between them and the "tippy top," if it exists at all, is not something that translates to on-the-job performance meaningfully anyway. If anything, the geniuses are the ones who get bored with how not fulfilling the due diligence process is; there's a great video out there about how David Rubenstein doesn't want "geniuses" to come to Carlyle because of this dynamic, for example.
  2. The chip-on-the-shoulder semi-target BS. Yes, I know that idk IU IBW is probably a more competitive environment than the "average" Harvard kid who goes to JPM. And in some ways, I do think that having to hustle your way through school alumni directory prowling and/or cold-email elbow grease is a highly respectable path for semitargets to go down. But if we're talking like the ~Hopkins level of semi-target and not the ~BC level, then there's just as likely a chance that the kids going to banking are doing so off "pure academics" than networking--BB classes are fucking huge in particular and not going to be as snooty as some of the smaller EB groups (which themselves are not as tiny as they used to be). And in any case, I find "hustle" to be a somewhat poorly transferrable skill; it probably correlates more to idk working out consistently than it does to work product ownership, attention to detail, upward management, client-facing skills, being "deal-minded," etc. Using it as a proxy for merit writ large is silly; using undergrad as a proxy for mental horsepower is probably just as, if not more, on the mark.
 

Sorry man, the Ivy kid in the EVR M&A analyst program can read through a CIM just as well as you can. I'm not sure what being "battle tested" has to do with being a good PE professional, but surely this EVR Ivy kid will be just as "battle tested" after their analyst program concludes. Meanwhile, while they were in College, they likely played a sport/did un-finance related academic research/wrote for their newspaper/a variety of extracurriculars that will likely benefit them more in the long run than somebody who is better at paper LBOs because they grinded them all throughout college instead of exploring new things.

 

Im sorry but this reads like a freshmen/sophomore who never met anyone in finance. They are the same set of ppl. The ivy kids at EVR M&A are also finance nerds whose extracurriculars consists of the 5 finance clubs on campus and spent a good amount of their senior years grinding PF. Most of them also recruited for MFPE analyst programs for both SA and FT as well but just didnt work out.

 

Ut et mollitia aut reiciendis nulla voluptatem et. Aut quia adipisci neque velit itaque veniam dolorem. Quis possimus aut asperiores dolor totam. Nemo neque dolore incidunt nihil. Corrupti unde recusandae sed qui. Quo earum error nesciunt aspernatur.

Career Advancement Opportunities

May 2026 Private Equity

  • The Riverside Company 99.6%
  • KKR (Kohlberg Kravis Roberts) 99.2%
  • Blackstone Group 98.9%
  • Warburg Pincus 98.5%
  • Bain Capital 98.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

May 2026 Private Equity

  • KKR (Kohlberg Kravis Roberts) 99.6%
  • The Riverside Company 99.2%
  • Ardian 98.9%
  • Blackstone Group 98.5%
  • Starwood Capital Group 98.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

May 2026 Private Equity

  • Bain Capital 99.6%
  • The Riverside Company 99.2%
  • Blackstone Group 98.9%
  • Starwood Capital Group 98.5%
  • KKR (Kohlberg Kravis Roberts) 98.1%

Total Avg Compensation

May 2026 Private Equity

  • Principal (9) $653
  • Director/MD (24) $547
  • Vice President (97) $363
  • 3rd+ Year Associate (104) $281
  • 2nd Year Associate (234) $272
  • 1st Year Associate (411) $229
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (33) $157
  • 2nd Year Analyst (95) $134
  • 1st Year Analyst (271) $124
  • Intern/Summer Associate (37) $80
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (351) $61
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
3
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
4
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
5
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
6
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
9
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
10
Linda Abraham's picture
Linda Abraham
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”