2021 Investment Bank Rankings for Exit Opps
Hey all, usually hate these posts but after seeing some questionable rankings, I decided to put my honest thoughts on a ranking of investment banks based on what I observed from buy-side placement across the street from 2016-2021. I am NOT claiming these are completely objective and undisputed rankings, but these are just from my observations throughout my time in IB and at an UMM PE fund.
Ranking
Tier 1b: GS, MS, Moelis, Lazard, JPM
Tier 2: BofA, Citi, Barclays, CS, PWP
Tier 3a: Guggenheim, Jefferies, Greenhill
Tier 4: William Blair, Rothschild, HL, RBC, HW, Baird
Tier 5: WF, Piper, PJ Solomon
Tier 6: Cowen, RJ, Lincoln, BMO
Tier 7: Stifel, Macquarie, Nomura, Leerink, Mizuho
Notes
-Ultimately Tiers 1a/1b have extremely similar exit opps but I definitely noticed (for NY PE recruiting) Tier 1a alumni did better regardless of which office they came from (as in Tier 1a placements were definitely much more diverse and balanced in terms of group/office compared to 1b)
-Tiers 3a/3b started off around the same tier but over the past few years that there's been a clear trend of 3a firms pulling away from 3b firms for NY buy-side placement. The difference and trend is large enough to warrant a 3a/3b, but not enough to be a completely separate tier.
CVP over GS? Really?
I can see where OP might be coming from, as CVP is generalist across industry as well as M&A/RX, and while GS has no bad groups they certainly have stronger groups that are better represented on the buy-side. Also CVP is the smallest T1 firm so their buy-side placement per analyst interested in buy-side recruiting is probably better than GS.
Cvp is not generalist across m&a and rx. Those are separate.
edit: they may have changed it I’m not sure. Back when I was recruiting, they came to my school for interviews and only let you apply for one of rx or m&a.
GS is only good if you’re in a good m&a group. The financing groups suck, except maybe levfin. If you’re comparing a top GS coverage like TMT/FIG to CVP, then sure, but most people aren’t in those
thoughts on GS Cross Markets?
deleted
What tier would GS Structured Finance (Infra & Project Finance and similar) be equivalent to for exits to regular credit funds? Might have an in with the team
pwp in 1b
I would like to hear the argument for both sides tbh. They've placed much better than their tier in the past 2 cycles. Not saying they deserve to be bumped but I think it's worth considering as I feel like they win all cross offers in that tier as well
No doubt PWP is a great firm and their analysts place well, but PWP has been a rapidly growing firm and from my observations their placements reflect that. My list comes from observing placements across the street over several years, and IMO if you look at average placements across my timeframe PWP is still below T1 firms, even though their placements in 2020 were easily among T1b.
If you just look at recent history and placements, I'd definitely put PWP among 1b. However, keep in mind that in general independent advisory firms and fast-growing firms tend to be quite volatile, and it'd be a mistake to assume that a firm's current trend and it's current PE placement will hold down the line. Just throughout my time from college recruiting till now I've seen Greenhill's placements swing up and down, matching the firm's general volatility. I think all the 1b firms have shown a clear consistency over a longer period of time in terms of placements than PWP, and that warrants their position above PWP.
Greenhill not that high. Jeffries not that high. Also, PWP on average placed way better into MFs this year and is dominating recently. Pls fix
I honestly think OP's assessment of Greenhill and Jefferies is pretty on point. Greenhill is pretty small so their per-capita placement into UMMs is pretty good and they also have a HW-esque culture where there's sort of an implicit "2 or 3 and out" culture where management encourages analysts to recruit for buy-side. I've also noticed that Jefferies punches above their weight for placement, probably because Jefferies is such a grind and the analysts get their reps and deal experience so they're pretty well-prepared for buy-side recruiting.
Lol disrespect to pwp
PWP had better placement than Lazard this year
PWP 10000% belongs in tier 1b
This ranking is fine except for PWP. They’ve been absolutely killing it since being more receptive to exiting
Perella should definitely be in 1b. Look at their recent exits from this yr:
2 Carlyle, EQT, Brookfield, Oaktree (SS), Bx , Centerbridge, Crestview, GTCR, 2 top HFs, Platinum Equity, KPS, KKR, Softbank, General Atlantic, Apollo, Ares, Madison Dearborn
Analyst class size ~ 21-22
They’ve been consistently placing into MF/UMM for the last 3-4 years. So much misinfo on this forum.
Folks love hating on PWP for some reason. As someone who didn't work there but had 2-3 friends there, anecdotally they are a fantastic shop to be at as an analyst. Supportive on buyside recruiting and seemingly good transaction exposure though again, all anecdotal.
Do you ever feel like knowing this exact information is super fucking lame?
Do you actually believe there are 7 distinct tiers of banks? This is useless.
You should divide rx groups especially for HL/PJT
lol no point in making these threads if the PWP goon squad is just going to take over and hype the firm up to infinity
I get that PWP has had a nice last 18 months but the PWP circle jerk on this forum has gotten out of hand.
Not to suck PWP’s nuts more, but it is just flat out wrong to have them in that tier given their recent exits lol. My friend there exited to MF
Thought on HL's exits? Obs for RX it's insanely good, but how about FAS/PV and CF?
What is the difference between FAS and CF. I thought HL was just RX and other basically. RX should have great placement into credit/HF funds and even PE
FAS isn’t even banking.. it’s just Valuations and modelling support stuff.
BAML and CS are a rung above the other mid BBs based on PE exits. And their top groups are on par with GS/MS
Barclays has better exits than both.
Do you have any data to back this up? The recent Opus thread contradicts this comment completely. Funnily, once again the Barclays weebs strike to not feel too terrible about the shitty brand on their LinkedIn profile.
I’m mind blown this idiotic statement has 11 SBs
we can all agree citi has the worst corporate pe exits of the 4 lol
CS just lost like 50% of their rainmakers & their top coverage groups fell apart. their outlook is worse than DB right now but good joke
Like others said, PWP in Tier 1b, but also GS/MS to 1a, Gugg/GHL to 2, and Jeff/UBS/DB in the same tier (3)
Gugg/GHL are no where near mid BBs, and PWP is certainly not ahead. Boutiques are so overrated on this thread. This should be the general order.
1: GS, MS, EVR, JPM, CVP, PJT
2: BAML, BARC, LAZ, MoCo, Citi, CS, PWP
......................................................................
3: JEFF, GUGG, UBS, GHL
4. RBC, DB, WF, Roth, PJ Solomon, HL etc.
This is such a bad take. Look at the EB exits from this year (one posted above) and show me the statistics that indicate that mid-BB has the same exits on average. There’s a reason so many people go from mid-BB soph summer to EB
you forgot to add KPMG lmao. pls fix
This is probably the ranking I agree with most on this thread. Surprised it has so many MS
This one reflects general street view imo. Surprised its so controversial
This ranking is more accurate than most
We need a 2022 updated list fam. Your list based on exits is pretty accurate
This guy said CVP has better exits than Goldman Sachs lol
They do.
Deleted
The exit opps for junior bankers are most positively correlated with the firm's historical reputation rather than current deal flows. It is about EBs BBs historical reputation, culture, hiring and training process. The deal flows are inherently volatile and largely influenced by addition and departure of key personnel which is not and should not be a measurement of a junior banker's competence level.
What about places like BNP, HSBC, SocGen, MUFG, etc? Are these below tier 7? lol
.
As someone who went through buyside recuriting few years ago and is far removed now, can someone please explain why PWP did so well this year? Is the dealflow / experience that much better compared to other top EBs / BBs or are buyside firms valuing "nicer" firms - i.e. firms with that actually care about their analysts, MDs really going to bat for analysts etc.
Goldman has the best exits. They are in their own tier
Does tier 7 have any shot at decent PE exits? Or would I need to lateral to have a shot at PE? I have an SA offer at one of these, but looking to ultimately do PE/growth. MF seems out of the question but thinking about UMM or MM.
I have noticed on this forum, people don't even mention Qatalyst. I am assuming it is because their analyst class is significantly smaller than the other EBs? They definitely should be 1a/1b.
Qatalyst is a top firm, but isn’t really considered an EB in the traditional sense. Generally, industry-specific boutiques like Qatalyst, Ducera, LionTree, M. Klein, DBO (all would be t1 or 2 on this list) aren’t grouped with EBs as they are so much smaller and are focused on one or two specific industries.
Would you add Raine to that list of industry specific banks too?
Hi everyone,
I wanted to share a forum where we discuss the markets, stocks, options, personal finance, and careers in finance. I think this forum will be helpful for those looking to get into IB, PE, or HF because we discuss what they actually require in terms of skillsets and the type of thinking you need to do when interviewing with them. It's more than just acing the modeling tests or answering technical questions. It'll also help you determine which path to go: private market investing (private equity) vs public markets (HF) or transactions work (IB) or service providers (equity research).
I have experience in IB, ER, and credit research and would love to hear your feedback on some of the discussion either in the Reddit or YouTube channel. It's called Midasinvestors and feel free to participate in our discussions!
Reddit: search for r/Midasinvestors
YouTube: search for Midasinvestors
Sorry they won't let me post links.
Thanks all
Never really liked the idea of ranking the banks. Implicitly it means I’m ranking the first impression on individuals from said banks by the same ranks, which seems shallow. I see why some do it - perhaps it’s to help others form offer acceptance decisions, or to seek affirmation of one’s choices, or something else. We’ve all tweaked league tables to make our banks credentials look as good as possible. Bottom line is, it’s subjective at best. You’ll never convince a kid from MS that GS is better or vice versa.
Wonder if it's possible that you could share some insights on choosing SA offer between MS (HK) and GS (BJ)? Thanks
Lists like this are so fucking lame because the BB's are so group-dependent. It's less true for GS / MS / JPM but even then people know the legacy value GS TMT / FIG, MS M&A, and JPM TMT / M&A carry. The MS "floor" for other groups might be a little higher than GS and JPM but obviously GS Consumer and Healthcare people get MF offers all the time so who knows.
At the other banks, exits are just going to be M&A / legacy baller industry group (I'm thinking Barcap NatRes, but that may or may not be dated) as feast and then famine for the rest. The risk proposition for being just another CS or Citi banker if you're not in one of their best groups is very different than if you're a good performer at Gugg / GHL (Jefferies is a little more churn-and-burn dealflow-wise as the "king" of the MMs so a little bit of a different beast). So putting those "lower" BBs above EB-adjacent firms doesn't make a ton of sense to me.
Same general concept at the top. EVR / PJT are just much more risk-averse options than hoping the staffing gods work out for group placement at the big banks, but if they do, it could be nice. LAZ, at least from when my friends worked there, had a very weird placement program where it was nongeneralist but also placement was a shitshow occurring post-offer during FT training, which complicates the matter a bit (all groups placed well, but very different work-life and cultural feels among groups).
Magnam quia dolorem molestias minima. Repellendus velit commodi accusantium exercitationem quam tempora. Recusandae ratione quia amet velit omnis tempore. Consequatur pariatur facere qui repellat nihil architecto ipsam.
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...
Et praesentium est sit. Possimus iure autem consequatur ad quo porro a. Perferendis nihil vero quis. Eius fuga aut eligendi explicabo reprehenderit eum ipsum est.
Dolor et adipisci aliquid in aspernatur. Occaecati dolorem quia sunt eveniet eos similique fuga. Dolore aliquam esse vitae quia iste iure. Quia nesciunt excepturi omnis aperiam fugit.
Ut eos quam vero et veritatis eum voluptatum dicta. Commodi voluptatem architecto quasi rem rerum. Necessitatibus veritatis itaque fugit error quo molestiae.
Tempore delectus nobis molestiae. Et neque reprehenderit accusantium et quos recusandae enim asperiores. Dolorem qui repellendus exercitationem sit hic ipsam.
Officiis aut dolores dolor quia. Molestiae incidunt adipisci aut. Totam harum blanditiis nemo cupiditate. Et quas dolores minus occaecati ullam. Aut dicta quod ullam commodi qui. Reprehenderit blanditiis saepe sint cum est pariatur. Optio itaque recusandae est quia ut temporibus quos. Porro vero tempora nam et.
Illo animi neque iure quisquam iste facilis. Officiis perferendis eligendi nihil consequatur quae. Neque iste et reiciendis consequuntur et necessitatibus dolorem. Et magnam sed unde rerum. Velit ab et quis perspiciatis aliquid reprehenderit. Sed atque rerum minus eos. Quod et ullam quia ut.
Pariatur sed quia soluta modi officiis porro. Incidunt sit dolorem ad. Molestiae quam numquam sint iste quidem.
Error illo qui rerum. Ut distinctio dolorum dolores tenetur alias assumenda voluptatem. Quia magnam qui quo facilis facere dolorem quia.