Unique situation of Fundamentals at Citsec/Optiver vs MF PE
Hey everyone, I'm currently in a situation where I'm trying to decide between a fundamental/equity analyst role at citsec/optiver but also have to opportunity for MF PE.
My background is in STEM at a T5 and did PE last summer which I didn't really enjoy for a few reasons 1) work wasn't stimulating and didn't feel like i was contributing 2) didn't want to play too much politics 3) I didn't want to always be on call and work from say 8-11 consistently and play optics
Was thinking of going to head back into PE until recently I interviewed with the prop firm and got an offer. However my main qualm is really the career growth at a prop firm. Career progression was very clear at PE and less so at prop: very standardized analyst -> assoc -> VP pay which was could get close to clearing 1M cash a year + a heft carry (which we can ignore for now). While prop is going to be paying a bit better for the first year im not in it for the short run and am concerned about career growth - supposedly most mediocre people don't clear 1M at a prop firm? Also fundamentals/equity analyst is such a niche role so I even have limited color in terms of how you tie the comp to progression for it.
Any and all color would be really helpful.
Based on the most helpful WSO content, here's a breakdown of your situation:
1. Work-Life Balance and Job Nature
2. Career Progression
3. Compensation
4. Exit Opportunities
5. Personal Fit
Final Thoughts:
Your decision should hinge on your personal preferences and career goals. If you found PE unfulfilling and are drawn to the analytical and fast-paced nature of prop trading, the role at CitSec/Optiver might be a better fit. However, if long-term stability and a clear path to significant wealth are your priorities, MF PE offers a more predictable trajectory.
prop all day and 3x on sundays
i’d find pe work mind numbing and seems like u would to
assuming that u enjoyed/are doing well in ur stem degree prop should be more interesting even tho fundamental is not as technical as qt/qr
I’d lean towards the PE path. Sure, it has its downsides, long hours, politics, and not always exciting work, but the progression is clearer, and the long-term potential seems more reliable. In a prop firm, it’s true that you can earn a lot upfront, but as you mentioned, the career path isn’t as defined, and it can be harder to gauge long-term prospects.
This is a tough one, imo comes down to whether you can tolerate doing PE for 2-4 years. Obv will be easier to transition from an MF to the prop role than the other way around, but if you hate PE and like the prop role than I would lean towards the prop shop - life’s too short to do a job you hate, and MF PE is very unforgiving if you don’t drink the kool aid
Don’t have much to add, but just thought I’d fact check: nobody is making $1M cash as a VP. Check the Hedrick and struggles report for an accurate number. Also, it’s not as “standardized” as you might think, making VP is extremely difficult and a lot more luck goes into it than might appear. Especially in this environment.
sorry - meant tail end of VP years and def not the start. Said 1M because I'd assume that once you do make it you'll be with the fund hopefully till the tail end of at least your VP years
Prop any day of the week - yes the progression is less clear but trust me you will make way more money way more quickly on the prop path. All the upside in PE is when you are 40 year old and have worked for 15 years at a firm (not joking).
Sorry, I have no idea what cursed or optiv are and neither does anyone else.
Non earum voluptas ratione nihil mollitia. Iste quae debitis quam et ut. Alias ipsam veniam eveniet doloribus et vel numquam. Non ea itaque exercitationem provident et eos voluptatem.
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...