Blackstone Advisory London vs. Rothschild M&A London

Subscribe

Saw a similar post on this from a while back, but want to see if there is any further insight on the reputation of BX M&A (not RX) in London?

Rothschild is in a league of its own in terms of number of deals in Europe, although a lower average deal size.. €499m for Roths vs. €1.3bn for BX in Europe since 2008 (MergerMarket).

BX has the better global brand name, and better reputation for quality of talent (at least in the US).

Any other thoughts?

Comments (8)

 
Jun 4, 2013 - 5:35am

Unless you are from a Continental Europe country and want to go back to your own country after few years in London (ie. Italy, Germany, France), I would go with BX 100% because of the brand, reputation, quality of talent, etc.

I'm grateful that I have two middle fingers, I only wish I had more.
 
Jun 4, 2013 - 6:48am

That's not true. BX presence in the Italian M&A landscape is nearly 0 while Rothschild has always been ranked among the top 3 firms.
If you want to have a long term career in banking in a specific country I don't see why you should start in a firm which has no presence in that country when you can choose to be within the top (closed to the top) firm there. Obv, if you want to move from BX in London to any firm in Europe, you will get all the interviews you may need to break in but you can skip the "interview" part joining that bank at first.
This, obv, only applies if you want a career in Continental Europe and you are 100% sure about this. In any other case, I would go with BX any day.

PS: I said Italy but I am pretty sure Rothschild has an higher deal flow also in France and Germany (I cannot comment on Greece since BX did the national restructuring process there).

I'm grateful that I have two middle fingers, I only wish I had more.
 
Jun 4, 2013 - 8:02am

For long-term banking I'd take Rothschild M&A.

[quote]The HBS guys have MAD SWAGGER. They frequently wear their class jackets to boston bars, strutting and acting like they own the joint. They just ooze success, confidence, swagger, basically attributes of alpha males.[/quote]
 
Jun 4, 2013 - 8:55am

I'd pick BX all the way - strong brand, good deal exposure, getting to work with smart people, which ultimately translates into exit opps (if that's what you're after). Comp is also consistently above average.

Roths is obviously a big brand as well, and they are very strong in certain European countries, but my issues with Roths in London are:
- Variable experience: they often get mandated on minor advisory roles (esp. on some of the headline deals), which are a nice way to collect a bunch of tombstones and for the firm to get paid, but not a great way for a junior banker to learn
- Culture: more hierarchical than most. To each his own, but I've yet to meet a junior banker who enjoys having more hierarchy.
- Comp: has not been great at the junior levels for the last couple of years

Yes, Roths is a good place for a long term banking career, but if that's what you're pursuing, I would still recommend starting at BX, just because you are likely to get better experience and deal exposure early on.

Start Discussion

Total Avg Compensation

September 2020 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (17) $704
  • Vice President (45) $323
  • Associates (255) $228
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (37) $203
  • 2nd Year Analyst (141) $153
  • Intern/Summer Associate (133) $141
  • 1st Year Analyst (561) $129
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (544) $82

Leaderboard See all

1
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
98.3
2
LonLonMilk's picture
LonLonMilk
98.3
3
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
98.2
4
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
97.8
5
Edifice's picture
Edifice
97.6
6
Addinator's picture
Addinator
97.6
7
redever's picture
redever
97.6
8
frgna's picture
frgna
97.5
9
NuckFuts's picture
NuckFuts
97.5
10
bolo up's picture
bolo up
97.4