Words of wisdom for folks on here, particularly younger people about to enter or just entering the workforce:
I'm not going to discuss my background or pedigree, but I will note that I was promoted to Managing Director at 30 while at a private equity firm. Yes—on the investment team, not IR. Funny enough, you'd be surprised who makes more between those two roles...
That said, I’m very grateful to be where I am, and I’m confident any of you—at my age—would feel the same. I’ve just gotten started, and I still have much to learn, but I’d like to share some of my findings with you all:
- WSO (Wall Street Oasis):
WSO is fantastic for folks in college hustling for internships or full-time recruiting. However, I strongly advise against using WSO once you’ve landed a full-time job as a means to assess opportunities. - Career Progression:
The very limited number of people who actually transition from being a "model/PPT machine" to a real MD role will tell you that they haven’t been on forums like this since college. The simple reason? They have no time for it. - Misguided Information:
Brilliant young people often get sucked into finance, which becomes a form of status game in college, largely because of rankings and hierarchies posted on sites like this. While WSO is a great place to share feedback and experiences about recruiting, the sheer amount of false information about rankings, hierarchy, and compensation is Grossly misleading, and could cost you your job—or at least an interview. Stick to recruiting and internships and landing your FT gig - but beyond that - talk to people who are actually in the industry because they're too busy to be posting on here.
Some Figures (From My Experience):
- 85% of people who enter investment banking specifically are no longer working at a financial institution by age 30.
- The same caliber of people who didn’t do banking out of college—but are “top of their class”—are making the same or more money than those who did banking, while working fewer hours, by age 30. They do start earning less initially, but the power of consistent compounding plays in their favor.
- Established, large private equity firms generally do not have true upward mobility. For you to become an MD, more often than not, an existing MD has to leave or get cut. Wonder why tenure at these firms is often short-lived? That brand name is useful—but only up to a point. I’d argue it’s worth less if you’re truly the "best of the best."
Why Am I Posting This?
I’m building a business. I’m interviewing candidates ranging from analyst to VP. There are some killer VPs or VP promotes (5-7 years’ experience) out there, but I'm having a very tough time finding juniors with 1-3 years under their belt who I'm comfortable investing in
- True VPs or VP promotes: Those who’ve been deeply involved in deals for years understand the industry dynamics. They know realistic compensation ranges, expectations at various career stages, and, most importantly, that the number of years you can work to "improve your résumé" caps out at around four.
- Younger Candidates: When I interview younger folks in banking or just exiting it, it can feel like I’m speaking with an ML-powered Kardashian-ranking algorithm based on posts from here. This isn’t limited to one background—I’ve interviewed candidates from the most prestigious banks, consulting firms, and top-tier schools, and this pattern still holds true.
It’s very obvious when juniors are making career decisions based on rankings or lists they read online. By the way – I have zero problems attracting talent – I am just unable to find someone I’d want to hire given all of this.
The standout candidates are often the ones who had to hustle their entire lives—those who worked their way into college or paid for it themselves – to get their opportunity. These individuals are often top-notch and "top of the game" because they’re thoughtful and have done real diligence. Imagine hiring an investment analyst who conducts DD by going on to forums?
My Message:
Be honest with yourself and your interviewer. Know what you want, what you don’t want, and what you do or don’t know about yourself.
Forgive spelling or grammer issues done via iphone rant. All the best to everyone on here.
This post offers some sharp insights for those entering or navigating the finance world. Here's a breakdown of the key takeaways:
Use WSO Wisely: WSO is a great resource for recruiting and internships, but once you land a full-time role, focus on learning from industry professionals rather than relying on forums for career decisions.
Career Progression Realities: Transitioning from an analyst to a true MD role is rare and requires more than just technical skills. The best in the industry are too busy to engage in forums regularly.
Beware of Misguided Information: Rankings, hierarchies, and compensation data on forums can be misleading. Rely on real-world conversations with industry insiders for accurate insights.
Statistics to Consider:
Hiring Challenges: The best junior candidates are those who’ve hustled, done their diligence, and have a clear understanding of their goals. Avoid making career decisions based solely on rankings or online lists.
Key Advice:
This is a candid reminder to focus on substance over perception and to approach your career with thoughtfulness and authenticity.
Sources: To Those Who's Had A Successful Career In CRE, What Advice Do You Have For Younger Generations?, Should I Slow Down?, Advice On a Career, How important is it one come from a rich family and be younger with regard to being hired as an Investment Banker?, Advice for a 21-year-old entering BB S&T?
Good shit, and go birds.
There's a certain irony in a WSO post stating that you shouldn't listen to WSO posts
Del
Touche
Thanks for sharing. Needed perspective
Great post. I was curious what you mean specifically by this quote:
“most importantly, that the number of years you can work to "improve your résumé" caps out at around four.”
I may be turning off notifications soon so if I don’t respond to further comments I apologize.
the profile of person, I believe, who can fall into the rat race and wake up realizing they’d have been better off scaling their parents restaurant into a franchise than joining PE, is the type of person looking for a system or roadmap to create success with peer approval as the benchmark. They are ironically also the least likely to be good at understanding risk, thinking independently, and as a result not someone likely to be successful in finance to begin with.
“I want to do Z, so I should first do W,X,Y, and Z.”
let’s think here:
- you are unlikely to truly understand your actual role within your job in its entirety until 24 months on it
- you’ve gotten 24 months of ppt and excel, along with maybe valuation methods for an industry, making you an ideal hire at a PE firm where your utility is a living breathing chat GBT
- 24 month clock starts again. Your out - no upward mobility there but good experience learning some more skills. You’re 26-28 at this point.
- do you want to save sex for your old age, or has your 48 months of work experience given you a good picture of what you want to do next? Said differently, what job requires more 24 month stints? If resume prestige is a collectible card go for it, otherwise go after want you want and use your age to make mistakes without risk. Otherwise you end up in your mid 30’s and you’ve gathered all this experience but you’ve got no time to try out jobs or industries outside of finance.
I know people who originate mortgages as salesman who earn $2mm+ a year in their 30’s. I doubt their resume or pedigree would impress you - but they have a lot of control over their schedule. Many had no idea that was possible but they love selling, are great at it, and found the best home for their skill.
im ranting on my phone again but moral of the story: focus on what types of tasks and challenges you love, not the approval of others. I love convincing people to work with me, I love mental math, I love logic, I love engineering, I love scaling problems, and most of all - I love selling what I truly believe in. Private equity is a vehicle I use to do what I love - but I don’t love private equity - I love what I create and build by deploying it.
Great observations, very useful for young fellas thinking about joining the industry...coming from someone as young and successful as you. Well written. But beyond success, I particularly liked your views on why it is about doing what you like/drives you and putting the effort and energy into it. As long as it is something society is willing to monetarily reward, money will follow suit.
It has been a recurring topic when I talk to young people about careers... Find the why, the true why you want to do it, and then you are on a more genuine track to find which path can deliver it. A lot of people, me included, lured by preconceptions on a career, to later find out we would have been better off starting from scratch on our career decisions. Some friends I think they haven't figured it out yet, and notwithstanding being hugely successful, spit blood every time they talk about work.
Your metaphor about sex is spot on. Why delaying something you enjoy, for "optimising" it for a later stage.
Kudos to you for your mature stance!
Let’s connect offline if interested ..
What you wrote resonates a lot with me. I’m leaving a very steady consulting role at a PE fund for a fun and interesting opportunity at a series C startup. I was hesitant about making the jump but realized that I ultimately want to be an operator and not a consultant, so why not make the change now instead of optimizing my resume.
god bless, go get it
Question as someone who just entered IB that formed in the past several years (so growing firm though less reputation obviously). I feel there's quite a bit of mobility with a great culture and I'm def well compensated, so I do want to give it 3-5 years. But I don't want to shut doors to reputable PE/GE, which it seems the move will be very very difficult if I don't recruit for pe asap as an analyst. How would you advice to someone like me?
Also, my firm's thinking of forming (potentially) a VC arm, but I am more interested in later stage investing and the money that comes with it (at least I'm told here carry from bigger funds tend to > lower VC funds > most IB). How true is this and should I be worried about waiting 3-5 years before deciding to recruit into the buyside? I do want to go to a 1bn+ fund pe (I like the idea), but am also wondering if there's little to no difference in ultimate wealth in my current role vs buyside.
I'm from a non-diversity, blue collar family and the first in my family to go into finance, so I'd really love to get your insights. Bit more context about my worries/FOMO here: Received an IB offer, how to think about PE/HF? | Wall Street Oasis
Delete
I've seen this too - have some v. brilliant friends who went to consumer goods and started as like a 30k year whatever marketing analyst and 10 years later are directors leading regions and in management committees making the same, if not more, than I do with certainly better benefits and wlb.
Id in quia impedit voluptas voluptate quaerat nulla. Suscipit recusandae ipsa molestias aut. Incidunt eos aut voluptatibus quo labore explicabo voluptatem.
Quis ullam similique nam saepe minima. Ex qui aut sit sit ea ea aut. Sequi sunt dolorem fuga non et rerum fugit.
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...