Accepted An Offer As A Trader At An Asset Management With Promised Progression Into Credit Research In A Few Years. But Also Have A Final Round For Equity Research Role Focused Purely On REITs. Need Some Help/Advice On This.
The job I've accepted is focusing on high-yield bonds and will transition to either a credit research or sovereign research position in a few years which is what the PM said. I interviewed with the PM of the fund and a few analysts (>100 billion+ AUM) - they're all great people from what I could tell and had similar career paths. Their analysts cover lots of sectors which appeals to me.
I'm also interviewing for the final round of an asset management firm focused on listed real estate - reasonable size but relatively small (<20 billion). This role will focus on REITs only but is in equity research. They want me to prepare a detailed presentation and I'm deciding whether it's worth it or not to continue with this because it's incredibly time consuming with no guarantee of an offer that could jeopardise my first role if I focus too much on it.
I like equities and fixed income but I've always been interested in equity research.
- How transferable is credit research to equity research? If I were to take the first role and get into credit research, would it be possible to move into equity research later on?
- How transferable is REIT Equity Research to other sectors and how easy would it be to move firms in a few years if I decide REIT Equity Research is not for me?
- I'm interested in equity research but would focusing on REITs not pigeonhole me completely?
Thanks for any help someone could give.
I don’t have much to add on the equity side or portability of credit research to equity but why do you think you like equities more?
- this is simplistic but do you get more excited in thinking about how things will go right vs how things will go wrong? If so equities could make more sense.
Does the idea of thinking directly about macro factors like interest rates sound unappealing? The equities could make more sense
does the more quantitative portion of bond math sounds unappealing? Then equities could make more sense.
I say this bc if you are agnostic then the first offer seems way better
1.) I’m biased but think fixed income is more defensive to automation and etfs than required for reasons long discussed
2.) the firm is bigger
3.) you get the chance to get trading and research exposure which is pretty valuable
4.) you also have optionality in moving to sovereigns without having to leave the firm
I love macro - interest rates, politics and policy is pretty much what I love. I love politics if that clears anything up.
Macro was my favorite economics topic in undergrad + I'm a numbers-driven guy.
My concern is that trading seems like a role that doesn't require that much thought - I'd have to do that for a few years and the internet makes it sound like it's pressing a button to get into my dream research role.
The REIT role would be in equity research which would be a 'thinking' role from the start. And equities just seems like the more 'exciting' asset class as you'd get exposure to the upside which sounds like it could be more transferable in the future.
I'm agnostic as to asset class though. I like the complexity of Fixed Income a lot - duration, convexity etc. that you just don't get with Equities.
Rem nihil fugit suscipit laborum. Ipsa et et enim quasi modi quam nisi. Consequatur ea maxime sed recusandae est. Ut est accusamus et optio dicta harum. Consectetur nemo aut error similique aliquid. Repudiandae fuga optio ad. Sit fugit occaecati nisi sapiente.
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...