The fund that I work for is slowly closing down. After a high of 2.5 Billion in assets, poor performance is driving away investors and our most talented traders have already jumped ship to another major HF.
i came into the company as the only non-partner employee (11th guy hired) and my initial role was to support the COO with operations and such. Over time, my role evolved into trading assistant. I was on track to begin trading my own ideas in my boss's portfolio after 1 or 2 years.
i'm looking for work in all aspects of front office: research, trading, sales, etc... I've had some fantastic interviews, but i'm mostly getting the same final response: they would like someone with more front office experience.
first off, is there anything wrong with my resume ?
secondly, is there anything you would change to make this resume sound less back-office and more front office?
happy to provide more information if needed
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| generic resume format.pdf 200.77 KB | 200.77 KB |
Start with formatting, use mergers and inquisitions, scrap the horrendous boxes
I hope the italic explanations are not for the actual submission, but for us to understand where you work, otherwise - scrap
There are no numbers - use more numbers! for every second line at least have a numerical value, e.g how much of what you traded/executed/monitored on a daily basis etc
I would put something interesting in the last, personal section so that you dont look like a generic guy
just my 2c
That's where you should definitely start, people who are more familiar with hf recruiting might help you more...
i agree with you that it does look a little weird. The italics is actually on my real resume, not just an explanation for WSO.
I used the italic explanation because people may not have heard the actual name of the fund that i work for, however they would certainly recognize the pedigree of the specific Big Wig who founded the firm. to give you an idea, the Big Wig i'm talking about was considered for CEO at Goldman Sachs, but decided to start a HF instead.
i debated not using the italics, but i fear that people would assume i was working for some no-name hedge fund with a no-name CIO, and i don't want to waste the last 2 years of my career on something that didn't look prestigious.
should i still take it out?
I would leave it in, but simplify it a lot. $2.5B AUM Global Macro HF founded by Name, former blah blah
Also, I absolutely hate your format and would advise using the M&I as well. It's classic and the best. Things center aligned like you have it are not keen to the eye. This has been studied and tested many times and people are first attracted to the left top side of the page. I see dates, not titles or company names.
Et aliquam nisi accusantium rerum vero explicabo similique. Quod corrupti alias quis consequuntur et. Et eius iure et quam aspernatur et. Quis est ut et expedita officia aut ipsum.
Doloremque voluptatem dignissimos illo nihil esse expedita consequuntur minus. Eligendi eveniet repudiandae in et similique optio. Maiores sit error harum ab consequatur quod temporibus quam.
Voluptas quia quam voluptatem magnam eos quibusdam rerum nostrum. Aperiam sit suscipit expedita rem qui sit. Culpa perferendis asperiores a delectus. Accusantium aut hic sed vitae libero quidem possimus ullam.
Et occaecati ea eos et eum dolorem. Accusantium libero officiis sed ipsa suscipit. Excepturi minima commodi reiciendis aut nisi nesciunt eos doloribus.
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...