Goldman Sachs - Prime Brokerage Securities Lending (Word on the street?)
I have initial interviews with this team this week. What's the word on the street about the desk? I understand broadly what the position is; helping hedge funds, etc. find securities on the market when they short/borrow. Seems to me to be a gopher-job and not much analytical thinking. Can anybody shed some light on the desk's reputation (please don't give me GS is the best, therefore great! Everyday desk is different and GS sucks at a lot of stuff) and exit-ops? I'm considering some hedge fund analyst opportunities largely because I want something really challenging and high risk...
Sec lending was actually one of the hottest desks at GS last summer for SA's. There is def a level of analysis involved because you are speculating as to which equities people are going to be shorting - it's somewhat similar to trading in that you're making calls as to how you see the mkt moving, but you're not committing capital so much as you are anticipating what your supply needs to be. It's been awhile since I thought about this stuff so I may be a bit rusty - but feel free to PM me w/?'s.
I will say this though - people may jump all over me for saying that Sec Lending has credibility/is comparable to trading in reputation etc, but at GS, the hierarchy of the desks is very different than the hierarchy on the Street in general. People at GS, are all really, really proud of their desks and think that their seat is the best one - desks like Prime Brokerage Sales, straight up Equities Sales & Sec Lending were the most competitive for summers last year, while desks with more street cred - ie Capital Structure Franchise Trading, weren't getting that much interest from SAs. GS places a LOT of emphasis on internal mobility and retaining top talent, if you end up working for them and think you'l be interested in sticking around - focus on finding a seat you really enjoy as opposed to one with the most "street cred"/"exit ops" - IMHO it matters less at GS than it does other places.
Thanks for your comments srr636. I'm not an undergraduate, but rather an associate at another BB as a fixed income quant/analyst, thus the reason why I am concerned about how technically difficult/quantitatively intensive the position is. I'm looking to move because in my current position I don't feel challenged and I'm not learning anything new in my daily job. I have also heard that Securities Leading isn't really considered "trading", thus why I am concerned that the position might stunt my growth and skill development. I'm honestly not interested in doing anything pure Sales related. Thanks for the insight.
from the little i know about sec lending (have a friend on the desk at a top BB and spent a day sitting with them)it didnt seem very analytical to me. it is called "trading" but imo it is far from it. as srr said you speculate which equities people will short but i personally cant call it trading when there is essentially 0 risk involved (you take the collateral posted by the HFs and invest in treasuries- this is really lame imo).
while people are certainly important i think you must look at your exit opps. i have a hard time thinking you have any transferable skills after spending time on a repo desk. no hedge fund will ever want to pull you bc of your great ability to determine the level of securities the buy side will be looking to short.
i dont know about GS's reputation in sec lending but i do know their PB is considered tops on the street (GS AND MS dominate PB).
personally i would pursue other opportunities to the extent they are available. i would figure out if you prefer a macro (rates, fx) or micro seat (equities, credit) and plan your focus from htere. i would take a seat in credit trading at DB LEH JPM for example over sec lending at GS any day of the week.
hope that helps
iambateman, thanks for hitting the concerns I had right on the head. The transferrable skills to HFs was exactly my initial concern and you pretty much confirmed my suspicions. Ironically, I had an offer from GS back in my senior year of college and I denied them because I knew the position I was offered would make it difficult to transition later on. I'm glad I took the research/quant role because I'm finding I can entertain interviews with a broad spectrum of positions now. I'll entertain an initial interview with them but I'll put more focus on my hedge fund leads. Thanks.
given the additional info that you're an associate and and are looking to move to the HF/PE world sooner than later, i would agree with iambateman as to how to proceed. things look a little bit different in terms of decision making calculus, when you're two years older and, don't have as much interest in sticking around at GS for an extended period of time/making your next move within the firm. when you're an analyst and are planning on moving to a diff seat at least once before getting out of the BB game altogehter - you have to consider "internal exit ops" - and at GS, the internal exit ops are high from Sec Lending because people think it's a baller desk. gluck!
//mods, close thread.
srr, love the technical terminology of "baller desk". oh ya and just to add one last thing at my bank (top5 bb), sec lending was not popular at all during rotations and they had to work really hard to secure their analysts.
bump for a more recent view on this divsion
Est sapiente ut est ut. Corrupti architecto sit nemo porro et sed. Necessitatibus aut molestiae officia et quia. Amet officiis et et soluta veritatis excepturi. Voluptatem esse autem perferendis. Rerum et harum ipsam natus. Quisquam itaque eaque minima et quia quisquam ut.
Rerum a id delectus quia. Sit harum culpa unde doloremque sit ut. Amet beatae officia molestias laudantium dolore aut. Dolorem totam iusto molestiae placeat.
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...