Traditional PE vs GE
For context, am a A2 at a UMM firm in coverage. I know recruiting is going to start soon for firms not named Apollo etc. I’ve been going back and forth on traditional buyout vs growth equity. They’re obviously very different but find both paths compelling for separate reasons. Would be great to hear stories of rationale on the key differentiators as to why some people pick one over the other. Whether it be work life balance, pay or something totally different. I’m gonna sound like I have no idea what the hell im talking about but have also flirted with the idea of Corp Dev for a major consumer company (think that would be pretty sexy).
Just one opinion, but I personally don't love the growth equity route. With some exceptions, what people call "growth equity" is really just one of two things: (1) growth-stage venture or (2) growth buyouts. The often-discussed "minority stake in a profitable, fast growing business" happens as well, but generally speaking, most GE activity is clustered around either venture-backed tech companies or bootstrapped, profitable ones. Either will be extremely sourcing-heavy, which many bankers dislike, and if the growth-stage venture route is what you're considering, it's worth noting that you don't really walk away with many valuable technical skills so your exit opps may be limited there. Softbank, for example, just made major US layoffs on its Vision Fund team. It's hard to imagine those folks will have any options other than going to another growth-stage venture fund or moving into a strategic finance role at a tech company.
Corp Dev can be pretty interesting, but I'd note that your comp will take a hit (no shame there, just not something that everyone can stomach). Also, it depends what your goals are long-term. Typically the IB->Corp Dev route doesn't allow you to reach CFO, and is more likely to come with a slow progression up the corporate M&A ladder, eventually ending as VP of Corp Dev. If that's something you're okay with, or if you're just interested in doing Corp Dev for the short term, that shouldn't be an issue.
Nonetheless, for all of those reasons, I personally would choose traditional PE.
I appreciate that and the lack of skill transferability at the growth equity level has been a concern of mine. It seems like traditional PE (similar to an analyst program with IB) is the best way to keep my options open. I would say on Corp Dev the cut in comp would certainly hurt but that would probably have to be a “dream” company scenario if that makes sense. Definitely leaning towards the traditional PE route
Source on the vision fund layoffs and scale? I've read here "MF PE doesn't do layoffs, employees' base/bonuses get paid out of the sticky management fee"
It was all over the news when their first round was done in Sep 2022 and then most recently in June? That general wisdom about PE funds still generally holds true...try finding another fund that's lost as much money and underperformed to the same degree as Vision Fund has lol
https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/softbank-prepares-new-round-la…
Plans to lay off 30% of the Vision Fund team
Can you elaborate on why IB > CD people typically get stuck at the Corp Dev VP level and cant really climb to CFO?
Are you based in the US?
Yes based in the US. I’d like to be in NY as well (closer to family).
What makes you say recruiting is going to pick up soon? Are you referring to 2025 or 2024 roles, or both?
2024 has been dead af for growth
Nostrum natus incidunt quia. Est expedita omnis iure voluptas. Nam sint ut non sed. Asperiores officia voluptate accusamus.
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...