Credit Asset Manager or Commercial Banking, which to chose?
Hi All,
It seems as if the markets for leveraged lending/direct lending is really popular right now. I am curious what the pros & cons of being a generalist (covering several areas but not being leaned out for everything) vs. a specialist in, say, a specific area of lending (software, consumer, biotech, etc...) I am just curious as credit asset managers pay and arm and a leg more than commercial bankers that might focus in one specific area. I am well aware that you can still specialize at a Credit Asset Manager but was curious as to why anyone would do commercial banking outside of 1-2 years....? You can move up quickly but I feel like commercial bankers aren't that highly regarded for running deal processes, getting stuff done, etc..
Also, at a Credit Asset Manager, assume that you are doing leveraged lending you can really pick up on modeling, CIM writing, transferrable skills that you would do at an Investment Bank/PE shop...plus from my buddies at Ares, Golub, Vista...they are compensated quite quite well
Kind of all over the place but curious on the pros & cons of Commercial Banking vs. Direct Lending (Credit Asset Managers)...
Credit Asset Mgt easy - better exit opportunities, more interesting, more transferable skills, better pay and decent work/life balance (vs. PE). Just out of curiosity, from your talk with your friends in Ares, Golub what's the pay like + bonus as you progress?
I figured Credit Asset Mgmt for sure. I am looking at CLO Credit Asset Mgr. So primarily buy-side but does some direct lending as well. You think you could make the jump from Direct Lending to PE just cause it's so similar in the LBO/re-cap specialization side?
Buddies at Ares & Golub at the analyst to associate level are freaking crushing it. I know a buddy in Private Debt as an analyst (2nd year) making $150-175k in a good year all-in. He works his ass of though - think 75 mandatory hours a week. Golub wise - they are right there. My buddy who is an associate came from I-Banking background and they gave him a nice sign on bonus (not sure what that was) and salary seems from my last time I talked to him (year ago) was around $150k in salary. So might be higher now and not sure how their bonus structure works.
Credit asset managers are not involved in drafting CIMs, that's sell side advisory - you'll most likely be looking at a CIM. At the end of the day, both commercial banks and credit asset managers/private credit/direct lenders/fincos make loans that are typically held on balance sheet. The differences are cost of capital and acceptable risk tolerance. Commercial banks have traditionally been more risk averse and focus on providing senior secured bank debt while the latter may have a wider risk appetite and may be okay with holding riskier paper like second lien, mezzanine, or unitranche products. It's not like commercial banks don't create cash flow models, but there is definitely more diligence required when you're holding subordinated/unsecured debt which are higher risk but provide higher return (which may translate to higher compensation).
In other words, credit asset managers sound like they do more interesting work.
I wouldn't say that exactly. Responsibilities are pretty similar in the sense you're doing fundamental credit analysis, cash flow projections, focus on legal documentation, etc. You might see more interesting credits/companies (higher leverage, distressed) outside a commercial bank depending on your mandate, but if you don't like going through credit agreements or doing credit analysis, the grass isn't greener on the other side. It's also a balance of risk and reward, typically bank debt loses 10-40% of principal in a default vs 80-100% loss when you're holding second lien/subordinated/unsecured paper. Obviously one job is more stable than the other and compensation is commensurate with that risk.
Appreciate the input here. It just seems that if you work for a credit asset manger you are most likely working for a fund. Commercial Banking never had that high of pay but it seems that its gone from the days that you could really make good money even as an MD at a commercial bank. My gatherings tell me that at the end of the day most commercial banks are just senior secured in the capital structure so at the end of the day you'd rather be at a massive bank than a small bank because it really comes down to (1) specialization (2) pay. Then from there you just have to leverage to a higher paying job with your skills.
I feel like (could be wrong) that at a credit asset manager you'd be jumping in on recapitalizations, direct lending, LBO's, M&A financings as opposed to commercial lending and just sitting at the top of the capital stack.
Credit Asset Management 100%. Way better transfer-ability. Dealing with "higher" level financing's (LBOs, div'd recap, direct lending to M&A transaction. Great exposure. Most people jump from commercial banking to Credit Asset Mgmt.
Also another perk is fundraising exposure given that most Credit Asset Mgrs (outside of BDCs that are publicly traded) raise their own funds.
clarity - when you say credit asset manager do you mean corporate credit fixed income institutional asset manager?
Aut est repudiandae sed tempora deserunt accusamus. Repellat nam alias itaque aut dolores et. Dolores sit praesentium aut fugit.
Enim rem quos adipisci labore porro. Dolores qui sit occaecati.
Praesentium magnam aliquam ipsam modi ut. Iste ut laborum sed quod et voluptates rerum in.
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...