AM vs Acquisitions at a REPE firm

Speaking in generalities here, real answers are obviously going to vary on a firm-by-firm basis:
 

1. Base pay is generally comparable but Acq groups have higher upside and will see much higher bonuses in good years. In bad years pay is gonna be very similar, sometimes AM pay can even be higher if there’s little deal flow. Carry is very firm dependent but yes, AM employees can still participate in deals. 
 

2. AM does generally have to work less but again this isn’t necessarily the case when there’s little or no deal flow. During average or good times, acq is generally gonna have longer nights and more fire drills that take up a weekend or keep you up until the late hours. AM hours are more predictable, and spike during budget/business plan season in the fall and early winter but are generally manageable at most firms. Megafunds and some leaner shops can still be 80+ hours though, even for the AM team. 
 

3. AM definitely gets less modeling experience than Acq but you’re gonna be still be expected to know how to at least function within existing models, even if you aren’t putting them together from scratch. Argus and excel tests are pretty standard, many interviews will also ask you to put together a waterfall or basic returns model even if you aren’t doing this in your day to day. 
 

4. At larger shops, the roles are generally going to be silo’d but at smaller, more entrepreneurial shops it’s totally plausible that you’d have job functions that touch on both areas. Many deals also have some gray area during underwriting where the Acq team will rely on AM for underwriting assumptions or market info and vice versa so you’ll likely get exposure to both sides regardless of which team you end up on. 
 

5. On the whole, Acq is the “sexier” job to outsiders and is closer to traditional IB/PE roles. The ceiling is higher for compensation and in good times you’re gonna make anywhere from 10-50% more than on AM. With that said though, especially at lower levels the work really isn’t that glamorous. Mainly updating your existing model for the 30th time based on a ridiculous request from a portfolio manager, the results of which will have no bearing on any decision, massaging IC memos to make the numbers appear more favorable than they actually are and doing market research. It’s repetitive and can get dry pretty quick depending on your team and the markets you’re covering. Acq jobs are also cut a lot quicker during recessions so job stability can be poor. 
 

AM has lower ceilings but is typically more stable. They’re the last guys to get laid off during downturns and the job is less results-based. Hours typically aren’t bad and it’s generally the more easy going group of the two. The day to day work can vary alot and you’ll be exposed to a broader range of issues than in Acq but alot of these are very menial tasks - getting deep in the weeds on issues like taxes, insurance, property management, legal documents, construction development, tenant relations, etc. One pro is that if you ever want to do your own deals, I’d argue AM is the more useful of the two since you’ll get a lot more operational experience and most deals (especially the ones you’d be doing when starting out) aren’t all that difficult to underwrite. 
 

Ultimately both have big pros and cons. If you can handle longer hours, enjoy the chaos of the deal process and want to be closer to classic finance, do Acq. You’ll make more money and the job is more interesting at the higher levels. 
 

If you value stability, don’t want work to become your life, or have an eye towards doing smaller deals of your own choose AM. Better WLB and can still make decent money.