Crossover vs. GE Funds

I'm trying to learn more about the GE and Crossover space. Why would someone choose one over the other? From what I've read, you can work in GE at a Crossover Fund, but at most funds, you can only focus on public or private investments. So, what would make someone choose private investing at a Crossover Fund over a GE fund?

Also, I noticed that some of the top guys at Crossover Funds are pulling in serious money. I'm assuming those are the people on the public side, not the private team? I'm new to this space, so I sorry if I sound dumb

9 Comments
 

Based on the most helpful WSO content, here's what you need to know:

  1. Crossover Funds vs. GE Funds:

    • Crossover Funds: These funds operate in both public and private markets, allowing for flexibility in investment strategies. They can invest in private companies (like a traditional growth equity fund) and also participate in public markets, often targeting pre-IPO companies or those transitioning to public status.
    • Growth Equity (GE) Funds: These funds focus exclusively on private investments, typically in companies that are more mature than venture-stage but still require capital to scale operations, expand markets, or achieve profitability.
  2. Why Choose Private Investing at a Crossover Fund Over a GE Fund?:

    • Diversified Exposure: At a crossover fund, you might gain exposure to both private and public markets, which can be appealing for those who want a broader investment experience.
    • Pre-IPO Opportunities: Crossover funds often invest in companies right before they go public, providing a unique opportunity to bridge private and public market dynamics.
    • Flexibility: Crossover funds can pivot between public and private investments based on market conditions, which might offer a more dynamic work environment compared to the relatively fixed focus of GE funds.
  3. Compensation Dynamics:

    • The top earners at crossover funds are often on the public side, as public market investing can generate quicker and more frequent returns compared to the longer investment horizons typical of private investments.
    • However, private investing at a crossover fund can still be lucrative, especially if you're involved in high-profile pre-IPO deals or successful private investments.
  4. Key Considerations:

    • If you're drawn to the operational and strategic aspects of scaling private companies, GE funds or the private side of a crossover fund might be a better fit.
    • If you're interested in market dynamics, liquidity, and faster-paced decision-making, the public side of a crossover fund could be more appealing.

Ultimately, the choice depends on your career goals, interests, and the type of work environment you thrive in. Both paths can lead to significant financial and professional success.

Sources: Differences between Co-invest and Secondaries?, Why Are Fund of Funds looked down upon?, https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/the-only-post-about-active-investing-you-will-ever-need-to-read?customgpt=1, Hedge funds vs. Mutual funds, Why do Top PE analysts / associates go to Tiger Cubs?

I'm an AI bot trained on the most helpful WSO content across 17+ years.
 

Thanks, I was more interested in understanding why someone would choose one type of firm over the other if they are both doing private investments? I’d assume the work would be the same, no?

For example, I see a lot of people from shops like GA, Insight, TCV and others go to firms like Tiger, Altimeter, Coatue. If they were on the private investment teams at these crossovers, what’s the reason for the switch? Money? I’d assume pay would be the similar unless you went to the public’s side.

 
Most Helpful

Thanks, I was more interested in understanding why someone would choose one type of firm over the other if they are both doing private investments? I’d assume the work would be the same, no?

For example, I see a lot of people from shops like GA, Insight, TCV and others go to firms like Tiger, Altimeter, Coatue. If they were on the private investment teams at these crossovers, what’s the reason for the switch? Money? I’d assume pay would be the similar unless you went to the public’s side.

Generally the crossover funds are leaner so an individual investor can have more responsibility (see how many investors Altimeter has vs. GA). But that doesn't necessarily mean they're better for everyone. Some of them have horrible cultures. Some do irresponsible things like Tiger did in 2021 & shoot themselves in the foot. Maybe they didn't get along with the senior partners at Insight but jive really well with the Laffonts at Coatue. I wouldn't read too much into individual moves. These are all solid shops. You can make amazing $$ at any of these firms.

 

"Growth Equity" is the most bastardized phrase of the century and is pretty much 80%+ LMM buyout for lightly capitalized vertical software companies. If you google "Growth Equity Firms" 20 out of 24 of those firms are doing mostly majority deals with a touch of debt.

In terms of Classic GE (read: Late-Stage VC), it can at a VC (GC, a16z, Thrive), GE (GA, GreenOaks, DST) or HF (Tiger/Tiger Cubs). Each of these varies a lot.

 

They got us both. Would say those roles are more similar than they are different. HF crossovers will take a more market research-oriented approach to pipeline, VC firms will dig from the well of early-stage companies they have, and GE standalones will have you sourcing 100% of the time, but for actual minority high-growth deals instead of bootstrapped VMS shitcos. Hard to tell without talking to people on the team as headhunters and firms will heavily obfuscate the actual nature of their work to get you to sign. Greatest "tell" for funding this sort of firm is lots of syndication in the Series-B+ of the companies they invest in - the companies doing LMM buyout never let other shops into the deal so if I see only one sponsor on the press release that usually disqualifies it.

 

Earum quia et quaerat ut necessitatibus illum. Iusto suscipit cumque labore officiis tempora cupiditate qui.

Eum tenetur officiis mollitia quo. Expedita modi quod iure.

Perspiciatis dolores totam qui voluptatem debitis. Nihil porro minima et quisquam quasi incidunt. Iure ut et fugit dolorum consectetur possimus mollitia mollitia.

Career Advancement Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.8%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.3%
  • Guggenheim Partners 01 97.7%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Morgan Stanley 02 98.8%
  • Evercore 01 98.3%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.7%
  • Banco Santander 01 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.8%
  • Morgan Stanley 05 98.3%
  • JPMorgan No 97.7%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (14) $434
  • Associates (44) $258
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (22) $179
  • Intern/Summer Associate (13) $156
  • 1st Year Analyst (78) $151
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (72) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
3
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
4
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
5
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
6
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
7
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
8
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
Mimbs's picture
Mimbs
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”