Guggenheim vs. Lincoln International vs. Houlihan Lokey vs. Macquarie
Title says it all, which one should I take for IB. Mostly interested in HC, but open to other groups as well.
Trending Content
| +134 | How to stop feeling like shit for not making it in IB? | 52 | 40m | |
| +99 | If Tik Tok is forced to sell, what banks do you think would be involved in the deal? | 46 | 46s | |
| +66 | Updated LA Banking Scene (2024) | 49 | 3h | |
| +54 | Why Is It Called Investment Banking? | 19 | 13h | |
| +38 | Ranking banks that went under | 19 | 7h | |
| +31 | UBS Actual Buyside Exits 2024 Post-Integration | 9 | 2d | |
| +29 | A strategy for SA applicants late to the game like myself | 12 | 10h | |
| +28 | Relevance of A-Levels for U.K. London recruiting | 21 | 45m | |
| +26 | Series 79 Help / Tips to Pass The First Attempt | 11 | 1d | |
| +25 | Burnt Out M&A ASO | 10 | 13m |
Career Resources
Assuming your interests are the best and biggest, I would go with Guggenheim. The rest are good, but they're MM whereas Guggenheim HC definitely will give you the opportunity to work on some blockbuster deals. Schwartz seems to always be able to get them an advisory role on Pfizer deals.
Did some digging on your behalf because putting numbers to these sorts of questions is cathartic to me.
With an eye towards HC, Pfizer-Allergan was the largest announced deal worldwide across all industries in 2015. Guggenheim was lead advisor to Pfizer.
Let's take a step back and zoom out from HC for a moment (who knows, you might hate the industry). For tech, they were on the largest announced TMT deal of 2015, representing TWC in the Charter deal. In terms of worldwide announced deals in 2015, the only bank you mentioned that cracks top 25 is Guggenheim. To give you some perspective, they were ahead of firms like Moelis, Evercore, Allen & Co., LionTree, and Greenhill. I was surprised to see that given to praise most of these firms receive on this site.
Just re-read my post and seems like I'm fanboy-ing. Apologies for the one-sided info, but I don't have the interest to spend the rest of the hour pulling numbers on the other three banks you listed. Maybe some monkeys who have been in industry longer can provide context. Hope this helps and congrats on the offers. All the shops you listed will put you in a good place.
@PariahOnFire
League tables and number mean little to absolutely nothing when it comes to the quality of an investment bank, especially boutiques. The only people that care about announced deal rankings are people who don't understand the industry (college students, main stream media), and some bulge brackets.
Many "elite" boutiques won't even consider working on some big deals because they won't get paid a high enough fee for their liking, so it isn't worth their time. Most boutiques care about building quality relationships with their clients and earning a decent fee as a reward; not flaunting their ranking on the league tables.
Boutiques also come in all shapes and sizes. To actually put things into perspective: Moelis has only 650 employees Evercore has 1400 employees Guggenheim has 2500 employees
So yes, of course Guggenheim is likely to have more $$$ in deals than Evercore or Moelis. When you actually look at the amount of deals and dollar value PER PARTNER, then you see why people rave about places like Blackstone / PJT partners (~400 employees), Evercore, and Centerview on this forum. Those are elite places that pack a punch, and are hard to break into.
League tables don't mean anything when it comes to quality of a bank and where the "best talent" goes. Think about Blackstone's M&A (now PJT) group: they worked on mostly 500million dollar deals (opposed to the billions), never cracked "Top 10" or even "Top 25" league tables, yet were widely regarded as the absolutely most sought after investment banking group (besides maybe their RX) and company to intern and work for (yes debatably with GS FIG/TMT and MS M&A but that's beyond the point).
That was a lot, but just wanted to throw in my 2 cents when it came to "league tables" and "quality" and "rankings."
2500 employees? No way, unless you are counting the insurance and Asset Management arms. Banking has 100-200 FO employees at most.
2500 employees...ya right.
HL is good, even though it will pigeonhole you to distressed debt in the future, especially if in RX. Although this is the case it is still better than Guggenheim based on what I have experienced/heard. A few people I heard have view of Gugg with culture being poor (lack of senior banker interaction with, exit opportunities sparse (have to be very impressive for headhunters to provide MM PE opportunities; no MF placement), upside was many snacks! Also clean office and that freshly signed offer looks nice at first!
Just wanted to clarify after my previous post and after seeing the discussion on on "tables"
@WallStreetWateringhole
So clearly still in college...
I'd take Gug. Two of my really good friends SA'd there last summer both are going back full time. Get to work on big deals in a relatively small environment, esp. in HC. Just advised on Pfizer-Medivation earlier this year, largest in HC in 2016 I believe.
If you have an eye on exits, Guggenheim places very poorly. HLHZ does better.
Hasn't Guggenheim only had something like 5 analyst classes? Pretty sure these classes were extremely small up until a couple years ago. People forget they were started in '09.
Friend who left Guggenheim for top MM PE fund said placement is greatly improving now that they are running real analyst classes. The firm invests a lot in junior guys and likes to retain them, which has contributed to the idea that they don't place as well as other EBs.
Even just thinking about it for a second, why would buyside shops neglect analysts who are working on some of the biggest deals in HC and TMT? Banks are just a collection of senior talent, who constantly play musical chairs. Those working in the industry are more dynamic in their perceptions of banks than the WSO commuity is. You're only as strong as your last deal when it comes to investment banking.
Well the thing is, headhunters DON'T work in the industry.
I can tell you right now that nobody at Guggenheim is getting emails from the major headhunters and that's generally not a good sign. Truth of the matter is that analysts there don't place well at all and you can see this from the large number of them that have lateraled. I don't have a dog in the fight but HLHZ undoubtedly places better than Guggenheim
If this is HLHZ M&A, your only considerations are Gugg and HLHZ. If this is HLHZ RX take it instantly.
Gugg would not be a bad summer experience and they have great deal flow but haven't exited a class that well to my knowledge. HLHZ M&A has a pretty good track record of exits, and HLHZ RX has a great one.
thanks for giving advice and making claims without pointing to any actual data. Posts like these just propagate group think and can hurt people seeking real advice
In general, I pay attention to the exit opps of former analysts when looking for strength of the group. GS/JPM/Centerview all dominate the crop. In this regard, the rest are way below and don't warrant any hierarchical ranking. CenterView is great with the old legacy pharma team from ML (best IMO along with JPM)
Guggenheim poached some top med devices guy from JPM and BAML earlier this year, and also a pharma guy from BAML a little back (who is doing the important deals now in HC). Indeed, BAML was another of the big names in the industry over the past decade, but they have lost a bunch of ppl. Still regarded well. I would argue HC is BAML's strongest industry group (only behind LevFin, maybe M&A) Would slot right below The Big Three.
Houlihan has poor deal flow but I guess you could go to them, which is a little better and try to abandon the sinking ship for JPM. Probably doable. By chance, did you apply to JP for 2017 as a HC analyst?
I'll second Guggenheim. Generally more friendly culture than some of the other shops, but good deal flow. Can't go wrong with HL either.
Macquarie is one I'll also stick up for. They are one of the more laid back firms I've run across...hell there was a guy who had a can of Foster's open on his desk when I got to visit the office. They also spoke more positively of their work/life balance....so it's a firm I'd consider if having megafund PE/HF opporunities are less important than having a better time on the job to you.
Aussie stereotypes running deep with that description lol
Not sure why people on this forum hate on Guggenheim's exit ops, I know a few analysts from there who placed into mega funds. This isn't 2009. I'd probably take Guggenheim, but HL is also a good firm. This forum holds onto biases for years and half the people who post are still in college and post what they think based on what they were told. I honestly wouldn't make a decision based on these comments and would instead make a decision based on what learning experience you will get out of it as well as how you like the people. When you are working over 100+ hours a week, you might stop caring about prestige and instead be drawn to what is the best fit.
Quas eos et et sit. Eveniet dolorem placeat quod voluptatibus delectus autem rem. Quasi similique sint quo aut. Enim voluptas quam dolores accusantium sint. Quis omnis quasi cupiditate. Provident est fugiat sed possimus voluptatem deleniti.
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...