Barclays ECM vs Macquarie Infra Debt Fund London

Atiba's picture
Rank: Monkey | 36

Hi monkeys!

The agony of choice ... which one would you go for? Both are full time experienced Analyst positions in London.

Thanks!

Region: 
United Kingdom

Comments (9)

Jan 12, 2015

Both are great roles, but I would say it depends on your long term career goal.

Jan 12, 2015

Agree but I'm kinda stuck with this decision. I have a DCM background, so the debt fund seems like an obvious move. However, going to equity and gaining experience on the other side of the financing spectrum could be also interesting. Just curious what the community here thinks in general and appreciate any comments ...

Jan 12, 2015

I'd go Barclays. But based on what you want to do, debt or equity.

Jan 12, 2015

If you're interested in doing an HF/AM, go the Debt Infra route....even if Barclays is a better name than Macq. You could bring a lot to the table with a DCM background as well.

Jan 13, 2015

Beware that infra debt can be a slow and boring monster, Mac is the best place for it but you'll no longer be dealing with corporates. So make sure you're "into" infra before getting involved, at least with ECM it keeps you open to tangential roles within "normal" corporate banking.

Jan 13, 2015

Thank you guys! Appreciate every input. Agree that Barclays might be better off in overall reputation but when it comes to teams I see it the other way round. Macquarie has one of the strongest teams in the infra space, whereas Barclays ECM is ranked somewhere between 5 and 10 in league tables (but imo there is strong potential/motivation to improve and they als have the ex-Lehman franchise in the US). On the other hand, ECM could still give me some more flexibility in career progression, whereas Infra likely puts a significant stamp on my CV. I was involved in some transactions for infra corporates but I wouldn't say that I have a lot of insight and that I feel dedicated to this industry. However, I wouldn't rule that out going forward. Generally, I would prefer working on the buyside in the long term and HF/PE would be the goal. In addition, I also have some secondary thoughts on job security and employee rewards. Barclays was cutting back the IBD division in the past months and I think they will still go through some restructurings and face regulatory difficulties. Macquarie, I have to admit, wasn't on my radar for any bad press so far but I guess also infra debt funds will be challenged by regulations sooner or later.

Jan 13, 2015

I can't comment on Barclays, but there is a fair amount of internal mobility in Macquarie's IBD, whether geographically or between teams. I've known people who have moved between 2-3 various desks over the course of 5-6 year stints there. Also, there's a good degree of movement from their IBD into their infra funds PE GP business.

Jan 14, 2015

Thanks guys

Jan 14, 2015
Comment