Drawbacks to working at a SWF
What are the drawbacks of working at a SWF?
Currently a senior associate and speaking with someone at a SWF on more of an informational basis than anything else. It got me thinking is there anything that sticks out about why people wouldn't want to go down this route given the opportunity? Based on the research I've done it seems as if comp is better at more junior levels. Does it level off? Outside of maybe cultural differences within the org itself depending on where its funding comes from, is there anything else that I am missing?
I'll just throw out a point that I think trying to generalize SWFs is not a good idea. Since they literally manage "in house" money, there is little standardization or common factors in how they organize, manage, invest, or hire. I don't think GIC and AIDA are similar (the two I've personally known the most people to work for), and the Canadian ones are very different from those. The SWFs are somewhat similar to other pension type funds (like CalSTERS or Texas Teachers) but with less regulation, all can set their own mandates and risk profiles (just like family offices). So, personally, I'd just research/ask about each one individually, dangerous to assume one is like the other.
Did you get any idea on comp
Brother, if you’re interviewing for the GIC job, just take it. I personally don’t think it gets much better in terms of experience. You work up and down the Capital stack and across the risk spectrum. Do entity level deals and asset level deals. Comp is in line with IB. Sets you up to exit pretty much anywhere. Idk about other SWF but that’s my take on GIC.
Ratione cum aspernatur rerum ut voluptate sint molestias aut. Ad voluptatem sed sed. Facere voluptates modi inventore reprehenderit accusamus adipisci.
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...