Is there a meaningful advantage to interning at a $6B growth equity firm versus a $2B firm?
I am comparing two NYC growth equity summer 2027 analyst opportunities and would appreciate perspectives from people familiar with the space.
Firm A manages around $2B and invests from a roughly $700M flagship fund. It has a smaller investment team, focuses on financial and business technology, and appears to make only a handful of concentrated investments each year. The team seems to be composed of a lot of people who came through intern or new grad programs.
Firm B manages around $6B across growth equity and structured capital. Its latest equity vehicles total around $1.4B, it has a much larger software portfolio, and the overall platform seems better known.
Compensation and location are essentially the same. Would Firm B provide a meaningfully stronger brand or better exits because of its size, or are these firms close enough that team, responsibility, and full-time conversion should drive the decision?
If you're looking to guarantee a job/return offer, (based on the fact most people on team a are former interns), I'd go with team a. If you're looking to maximize learning and experience, I'd go with b since they have more volume, larger teams. Looking for exits, I'd go with b because of the larger team (=larger network) and larger fund size/higher volume.
Is it smarter to optimize return (safety) or prestige here in your opinion?
I think that's more for you to decide. Soneyson had a few good points too where if the work is better at A, go with A. All in all, pick one avenue and take the one that best matches it, deal size/volume/reps (assuming B gives you better work) or similar work but a slightly less known name but a guarantee in B. If you have to make a decision on A before finding out B, I'd go A, but if you can look at both side by side, then I could go either way.
Yeah, I might end up having to make the decision earlier and go with A. Is this really worth reneging on, or not?
Idk how good or bad option A is. Go on linkedin find previous ppl that have done option a and see where they ended up. If you're happy with that, then go a. If not, option b may be the answer, or take option a and network your balls off lmao
Both are fine.
B will look a bit stronger and the brand is better known, so if you’re thinking about later PE/growth recruiting it might help a little. More deals too.
But for a analyst seat the bigger factors are usually how much real work you get, who’s on your team, and what the conversion looks like. Smaller firm can sometimes mean more ownership.
The AUM gap between 2B and 6B isn’t that dramatic at this level.
Since companies are inviting you to join them, I assume you already have some experience; however, I think a smaller firm would give you more opportunities to do actual work, which would be beneficial for gaining further experience.
Team + responsibility > pure size.
No experience; these are for junior-year internships. I just got the offer for Firm A, which I like a lot, but I am still in the running for B, which could be stronger. Is there a point in me continuing to interview or just take what I have?
Nihil facilis ab consequuntur est ut voluptatem. Voluptatum porro quibusdam deserunt eligendi officiis quia quod. Quia id alias et nisi perferendis.
Sapiente dolorem ut cupiditate impedit quas. Harum temporibus nemo qui veritatis autem repudiandae.
Necessitatibus dolorem velit veritatis sint odit. Aperiam ea doloribus aut harum quo. Culpa rerum sit voluptates.
Eaque qui eveniet totam culpa veritatis error. Et quae optio at nihil aut rerum. Ducimus natus perferendis voluptas inventore tenetur quia. Officiis quod ut enim similique.
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...