Ive worked in both. LBO shops have fundamentally different work than growth. Growth equity firms like summit have you just cold calling if youre an associate - usually growth equity is of a much smaller investment, which necessitates targeting smaller companies as opposed to lbos which typically just go through a bidding process where the relationships are managed by the principals. LBO shops have a much more technical basis for their associates. Im presuming you mean for associate roles. At the higher levels, I think the firms are respected more on their ROA rather than the strategy.

“...all truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.” - Schopenhauer
 

Modeling at growth places is done by the vice presidents typically where as that would generally be handled by the associates at growth places.

Modeling is the same at most places. Nothing new. Just the associates at growth places are telemarketers.

I enjoyed the lbo place more but that was probably because of the people. In terms of growth potential for the individual, it just depends on how hard they work - lots of guys at summit go to harvard and do well for themselves - same as lbo places.

Pay is higher at lbo places. They typically will only take stars who come from i banking jobs. Growth places may pay comparable but theyre highly based on how much you do/how many calls you make.

“...all truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.” - Schopenhauer
 

what's the point of growth equity if you're a telemarketer...

Like, I understand you're developing soft skills, but you're not so much a "financier" as you are a phone monkey instead of an excel monkey, right?

At least in IBD you have something to show for it (i.e. you learn how to value and analyze companies).

What do you get from growth equity? I don't see the value proposition...

 
Best Response
kidflash:
what's the point of growth equity if you're a telemarketer...

Like, I understand you're developing soft skills, but you're not so much a "financier" as you are a phone monkey instead of an excel monkey, right?

At least in IBD you have something to show for it (i.e. you learn how to value and analyze companies).

What do you get from growth equity? I don't see the value proposition...

you're missing the big picture. First, not every growth equity firm makes you a telemarketer. Summit is famous growth PE firm known for its sourcing model for associates, but not every firm is set up that way.

Second, sourcing is the important skill in the end. If you ever want to be a bigshot MD, you need to bring in deals. Sourcing isn't just mindless telemarketing. You don't just randomly call companies, you need to strategize how to manage your time so you'll actually land a deal and close it. You need to have the eye to see which companies can yield a favorable investment return. You need to know how to talk to CEOs as an associate (which some CEOs find offensive). And of course, even if the VP takes over the deal eventually, you'll still do some analysis before you hand it off.

Third, modeling is not as useful for growth PE as growth is speculative - which means the models can be complete shoot in the dark. You usually value companies based off of expected returns.

fourth, umm, you must've not done a lot of IB because most of the time you're just making powerpoints to pull in deals as well (ever heard of a bake-off?)

 

Couchy, I enjoyed your comment so much it compelled me to dig up my WSO password just so I could tell you how much I enjoyed your comment.

 
couchy:
kidflash:
what's the point of growth equity if you're a telemarketer...

Like, I understand you're developing soft skills, but you're not so much a "financier" as you are a phone monkey instead of an excel monkey, right?

At least in IBD you have something to show for it (i.e. you learn how to value and analyze companies).

What do you get from growth equity? I don't see the value proposition...

you're missing the big picture. First, not every growth equity firm makes you a telemarketer. Summit is famous growth PE firm known for its sourcing model for associates, but not every firm is set up that way.

Second, sourcing is the important skill in the end. If you ever want to be a bigshot MD, you need to bring in deals. Sourcing isn't just mindless telemarketing. You don't just randomly call companies, you need to strategize how to manage your time so you'll actually land a deal and close it. You need to have the eye to see which companies can yield a favorable investment return. You need to know how to talk to CEOs as an associate (which some CEOs find offensive). And of course, even if the VP takes over the deal eventually, you'll still do some analysis before you hand it off.

Third, modeling is not as useful for growth PE as growth is speculative - which means the models can be complete shoot in the dark. You usually value companies based off of expected returns.

fourth, umm, you must've not done a lot of IB because most of the time you're just making powerpoints to pull in deals as well (ever heard of a bake-off?)

This is a good reply. I'd also add that many of the IBD guys are doing nothing but cranking out powerpoints for pitching. Is that really any better than telemarketing?

I'd like to point out that growth equity isn't necessarily a "shot in the dark". The way you worded it makes it sounds like venture capital. While it is hard to quantify the projections accurately, the direction anticipated capital structure can be modeled out.

 

To directly answer the OP's question, among the IBD analyst community which is generally recruited by both growth equity and LBO shops, LBO is considered the more "respected" exit opportunity.

This doesn't necessarily make it a better career, but as prior posts have alluded, LBO funds are seen as hiring IBD analysts for skill at valuing and structuring a complex deal whereas growth equity is sometimes seen as hiring IBD analysts to maintain an army of well-heeled cold-callers with good resumes to put online so prospective recipients of investment capital pick up the phone.

 

Growth equity does not automatically imply a sourcing model. Let's be clear.

When one man, for whatever reason, has an opportunity to lead an extraordinary life, he has no right to keep it to himself.
 

I agree with the above, both buyout and growth equity shops can be sourcing heavy, although neither are exclusively so. There are plenty of buyout shops where the principals avoid the bidding process and therefore utilise their associates for proactvie deal sourcing. There are also numerous growth/expansion shops which will source through their network/connections, sell-side etc.

 

Not to mention there are a lot of late stage growth / LBO hybrids. Even LBO/buyout shops require a "growth" story to every deal they do now, financial engineering no longer cuts it in this market.

There are a lot of growth shops that don't have a sourcing model and are merely buyout shops that require majority control of companies with great growth stories. Everything else concerning the deal is the same as a traditional LBO (leverage of 50-70%, strong FCF generation, etc.)

 
SanityCheck:
Not to mention there are a lot of late stage growth / LBO hybrids. Even LBO/buyout shops require a "growth" story to every deal they do now, financial engineering no longer cuts it in this market.

There are a lot of growth shops that don't have a sourcing model and are merely buyout shops that require majority control of companies with great growth stories. Everything else concerning the deal is the same as a traditional LBO (leverage of 50-70%, strong FCF generation, etc.)

True. OP, a shop like H.I.G. has various funds that invest across different stages (growth, mature, distressed) and some of their guys have jumped around between them. In a group like this, growth equity still represents buyouts or significant minority investments in companies that are still in the growth phase.

 

Sorry to revisit an older thread. There are a lot of lists on this site of growth equity shops that have sourcing models. What growth equity/hybrid firms have a more traditional model?

Do you know if Great Hill Partners, Weston Presidio, TPG Growth or Accel-KKR have sourcing models?

 

All growth equity shops have a semblance of a sourcing model, simply because check sizes are smaller and bankers aren't usually queuing up in front of companies to take mandates for $50MM growth equity deals.

They need sourcing to generate deal flow. Also growth equity shops tend to spend less time evaluating a deal till they get very serious about it (no complicated structures, no debt modelling and lender discussions), so the junior folk usually has more time to actively source deals. I know guys at TPG Growth, Carlyle Growth, GA all spend time sourcing and executing deals just like the guys at traditional sourcing heavy shops like TA.

Summit, however is a whole different ball game since its a 100% sourcing model.

 

Thanks for the response. I guess my question was do you know if these funds source through associates' telemarketing efforts or through going to industry conferences, meeting with entrepreneurs, etc in addition to being on the phone. The latter sounds a lot more interesting to me.

 

Aspernatur laborum in natus alias voluptatum deserunt corrupti. Dolorem eveniet pariatur accusamus est soluta qui ullam. Incidunt ipsam laborum eius est quibusdam. Aliquam magnam aperiam quas qui aliquid et aperiam.

 

Voluptatem cupiditate repudiandae quam sunt eaque ut cumque. Id sit mollitia reprehenderit iusto ut. Quisquam modi itaque sit eos sit dolores. Aut numquam asperiores sed.

Neque cupiditate eius animi nobis in. Magni sit tempora temporibus minima. Facilis dolorum quas corporis eius. Nihil voluptatem possimus numquam explicabo. Ut qui eaque totam impedit beatae dolorem. Pariatur repellat non qui aspernatur et. Odit dolorum cum veritatis et non rerum.

Dolor minima in provident est voluptatem et. Omnis ipsam debitis ex.

Career Advancement Opportunities

June 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Lazard Freres No 98.9%
  • Perella Weinberg Partners New 98.3%
  • Harris Williams & Co. 24 97.7%
  • Goldman Sachs 16 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

June 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.9%
  • William Blair 02 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 07 97.7%
  • Morgan Stanley 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

June 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.9%
  • Perella Weinberg Partners 18 98.3%
  • Goldman Sachs 16 97.7%
  • Moelis & Company 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

June 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (23) $378
  • Associates (95) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (14) $181
  • 2nd Year Analyst (69) $168
  • Intern/Summer Associate (34) $167
  • 1st Year Analyst (208) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (153) $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
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
4
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
5
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
6
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
9
bolo up's picture
bolo up
98.8
10
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
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...”