Is It Easier to Get into IB or S&T?
Hi everyone,
I'm a rising sophomore planning to apply for the SA 2026 internships in both IB and S&T. While I have a preference for one over the other, I'm curious about which is generally easier to get into. I’ve heard that IB is the most sought-after entry-level finance job, but that S&T is known for being highly meritocratic.
I would really appreciate any insights or advice as I decide whether to apply to one position or both. Thanks a lot!
Would argue S&T overall is easier, but VERY desk specific. Certain trading desks will be much more competitive than IB
Thank you so much for the insight! Could you please elaborate a bit more on the specific desks? Which trading desks tend to be the most competitive, and which ones are generally less so?
certain desks that involve delta one / equity derivative products would require a lot more math = more competitive
exit opps a lot better as well, many good exits
would say theres less seats in s&t than ib as well
Highly dependent on the bank, but options desks across asset classes will generally be most competitive and require a very quantitative skill set
Why does it matter - if you are not good enough you will not make it in either
Completely useless and retarded comment. Thanks.
Depends on desk and your profile.
Thank you! Could you please elaborate a little bit based on your experience? Also, I think most banks' S&T internships now are rotational. Does that change its competitiveness compared to IB?
I've done IB SA at an EB and also SA in S&T at a BB. Received multiple offers for IB and S&T - imo it's fairly similar. S&T naturally has less applicants, but there are also less seats in S&T.
Don't think much has changed since my time but not really helpful to compare which is more competitive.
IB will have the sheer volume of applicants (backed by more seats). However, there is huge variation in the quality of applicants given everybody knows about it.
Whereas in S&T, less volume but also less seats. This is compounded by the applicants also being genuinely interested in the space so you generally have a higher quality of applicants. Of course, you have the odd person who only knows about traders making loads of $$$ but those get filtered out pretty quickly.
Thank you so much for your valuable advice! Based on your experience, would you say that a candidate who is well-prepared in both behavioral and technical aspects has a better chance of securing a position in IB compared to S&T? Since you said that candidates for S&T tend to be of higher quality. Additionally, I've heard that the return offer rate for S&T is significantly lower (~50%) compared to IB (around 70-80%). Is this true?
I really appreciate your insights!
Hey. I'm a VP in S&T at a BB firm and I am also heavily involved in the recruiting initiatives at my firm.
It 100% depends on the desks you end up on.
In S&T, a few firms tend to have weekly or biweekly rotational programs, which I believe make it easier to convert - you are able to network more broadly and more frequently, the projects are usually straightforward as you only get to spend 1 to 2 weeks on each desk (and there is only so much you can learn in such a short amount of time), you can pivot more quickly if you decide a desk is not the right fit for you and eventually spend more time with the desks that match your preferences/personality type etc...
In IB, you may end up stuck on one desk, and even if you figure out early on that it's not for you, you still have to stay there and do the work, hence losing some valuable time to network around, and find the right desk for you.
Some may argue that rotational internships in S&T are harder than IB, because these tend to be a lot more cut-throat and competitive. You are being compared to another 60-80 interns constantly.
Ultimately, base your decisions on the type of work you are willing to do. People who get full-time offers usually genuinely take interest in their division and thrive in the environment they're put in.
Thank you so much for your valuable advice! Based on your experience, would you say that a candidate who is well-prepared in both behavioral and technical aspects has a better chance of securing a position in IB compared to S&T? Since I've noticed from the comments above that candidates for S&T tend to be of higher quality. Additionally, I've heard that the return offer rate for S&T is significantly lower (~50%) compared to IB (around 70-80%). Is it true?
I really appreciate your insights!
The two jobs are quite different the profiles of candidate are different as well. I dont know a single person gunning for BB/EB apply to S&T
Really? Could you please explain a little more? I thought all BBs have great S&T division. Or did you mean because of the low return offer rate, hardos who really want BB/EB choose IB instead to have a higher chance of securing FT?
Thanks so much!
Hardos dont like S&T because no PE funds hire S&T. Rlly it lol. They will dive head first into a MFPE SA with a 30% return rate so that is not a point they care abt.
They are very different skill sets. S&T is very markets focused, and trading/structuring specifically will generally attract more quantitative people than IB. IB is a much broader applicable skill set that uses accounting and more finance fundamentals
"Is IB Or S&T easier" is a silly question. I don't say this to be mean, but only a fool would decide career decisions off of that. Furthermore, there is not a simple yes or no answer to your question. That being said, having interviewed for both BB IB/S&T and now accepting offer for S&T, these are my takeaways:
1. Target/non target status tends to be a much bigger deal in IB recruiting. The percentage of non targets in S&T is much higher (the exception is more quant stuff like structuring/some forms of trading)
2. These are totally different jobs (common sense right?). The ideal IB candidate is a hardo workerbot who can grind out 100 hour weeks without breaking a sweat. The ideal S&T candidate is somebody with good social skills, some math ability, and an innate passion/curiosity for markets. (This varies based on what desk you're on - equity sales-trading is very different from structured products)
3. There are are far more spots in IB (again common knowledge) than S&T. Furthermore, for a variety of reasons, IB is MUCH more "popular" than S&T. If somebody tells you they are "interested in IB" then there is a good chance they are one of those campus chuds who doesn't know squat and just follows the hype. On the other hand, if somebody tells me they want to go into S&T, I assume that they are actually pretty interested in it, as it is off the beaten path in 2024. This rule of thumb has generally held true in my interactions on/off campus. The S&T equivalent of the "I Like IB" campus frat bro is the "I'm a day trader" types on social media (I really hate those people).
4. I've heard a few stories of people starting off in S&T at a BB and then transferring internally/lateralling externally to IB. I even know of a guy from my school who did BB S&T -> internal transfer to IB, and then MF PE. I've yet to hear of a single person going from IB to S&T. How you interpret this is up to you.
5. Connections make things so much easier (again common sense lol). If you have a strong "in" somewhere in either S&T or IB, that will trump most other advantages.
As you can see, the question of "is IB or S&T easier" really depends on your situation - are you target? Are you really good with people/math? (real math, not excel) Do you have a big personality? (This matters a LOT for S&T, especially sales guys) Furthermore, are you motivated enough to study technicals/behaviorals on your own? Unlike IB recruiting, you wont have your campus M&A society/investment club handholding you through the S&T recruitment process, so you need to be a self starter.
As for WHY IB or WHY S&T, that is an entirely different conversation. I am definitely in the S&T>IB school of thought, unless you're autistically obsessed with Mega Fund PE.
Thank you so much for the valuable analysis and advice!
I have one quick question: You mentioned that you've interviewed and received offers for both BB IB and S&T. Would you recommend applying to both divisions at the same bank? I've heard that applying to both could potentially increase my chances (as I am willing to work in both), but that I will usually end up with one interview only. Additionally, some say that applying to multiple divisions could imply a lack of strong interest in either division, which is clearly looked down upon.
Thanks again!
I applied to both IB/S&T for every bank that had both and allowed me to apply to both. Most banks let you apply to 3 internships per recruiting cycle. Notable exception is Barclays. Anytime that I had to choose, I applied to S&T over IB. I can understand wanting to apply to both, as you simply want to get in the door on wall st. I think that’s a reasonable course of action, but only if you do the required prep work for both. Spreading yourself thin doing both is much less optimal that doing really well at just one of them, and could be the difference between an offer and no offer.
I say this because S&T requires just as much networking as IB, maybe even more due to the lower amount of spots (exception being MIT math geniuses applying to quant). It takes a lot of damn time to do “recruiting” well. I honestly put like 80% of my effort into S&T as that was what I truly wanted. I got IB first rounds relatively easily due to target school connections, but most of them didn’t progress to superday because I didn’t grind for those nearly as hard as S&T
Unde et aut facere nesciunt at. Earum dolor nobis ex vel quae soluta tenetur ea. Praesentium voluptatem esse illum sunt et voluptatum.
Totam autem eos vero aut quisquam molestias omnis. Nobis qui consequatur voluptatem ut ratione dolores. Id recusandae dolorem et amet quia. Fuga autem rerum nulla 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...
Ut reprehenderit perspiciatis deleniti inventore. Aut rerum et vero nam neque modi. Eveniet et fugit velit ratione quis.
Placeat omnis quidem dolor est quia. Sed nostrum quam vitae porro impedit consequuntur. Sit dolore et dolorum voluptas sit autem eaque debitis. Unde fugiat in nulla hic.
Sunt fugit blanditiis eos consequatur. Nostrum voluptas dicta beatae pariatur dignissimos cumque aspernatur. Exercitationem nobis laudantium illo occaecati consectetur error. Illum ut autem quisquam. Cupiditate at similique nobis quam aut eveniet hic. Modi ut eius nisi enim quod quidem.
Qui voluptates et quia quia architecto quia. At laboriosam est impedit assumenda voluptatem eius quibusdam rem. Beatae est sequi minima necessitatibus explicabo quas et. Fugit optio adipisci velit non nobis at est qui.