Is this insider trading?

I recently finished up my IBD SA at a BB and worked on some very interesting middle market names that after working with I now consider to be very good investing opportunities. The internship is over and I decided not to continue with that bank so my question is when would it be OK to invest in names I worked on?

I did receive private information from these companies a few months ago, including projections, but I no longer have access to this information nor would I remember. Do you think I am in the clear? My reasons for wanting to invest are not related to the information I received, but simply the fact that I met the mgmt teams and think these are really great companies.

 

This is too vague to answer definitively. Here are a few possibilities. If the information that you were provided has since been publicly disseminated, then you would likely not be trading on inside information but what basis do you have to make the investment today? However, if that information is still private information, then you likely will be as it appears from your posting that you didn't do any independent analysis to form a basis for making the investment. Even if you did drum up some basis, the fact that you possess material inside information will still make this insider trading.

 

Best way to get a definitive answer is to probably ask your bank's compliance department. I wouldn't go ahead and invest just because some people on an internet board told me it was okay. My guess is those stocks are on the restricted list at your firm and there is a certain period of time you have to wait after you left to purchase any of those securities. But I'm just some jabroni on WSO so you should probably be 100% certain before you go and risk insider trading.

 

Do it. The worst they would ever do is they would put you for a couple of months into a white-collar, minimum-security resort. Shit, we should be so lucky. Did you know, they have conjugal visits there?

Under my tutelage, you will grow from boys to men. From men into gladiators. And from gladiators into SWANSONS.
 

I guess it is best to play it safe even though my basis for investment is completely unrelated to any inside information I had. The most valuable thing I had was the model but I never compared it to street expectations and now forget all mgmts assumptions.

There has to be some sort of established blackout period I would assume though. Anyone else ever have a situation like this? I doubt people who work on names several months/years prior are constantly talking to their old bank's compliance dept...

Best Response
Richard Johnson:

I think, you cannot decide to invest in a company by looking at just the management team. You have to check the company reputation and its assets.

Whoa, we got a real warren buffet over here guys.

Under my tutelage, you will grow from boys to men. From men into gladiators. And from gladiators into SWANSONS.
 
Flake:
Richard Johnson:

I think, you cannot decide to invest in a company by looking at just the management team. You have to check the company reputation and its assets.

Whoa, we got a real warren buffet over here guys.

moar liek jimmy Buffett

speed boost blaze
 

Wait until the company's next employee trading window. That will normally start 48 hours after release of their 10-k or 10-q. That indicates that the company thinks its management team is clean of any inside intel. If management is clean, then you're definitely clean based on what you've said.

If there has been a 10-k or 10-q since you left your internship, then you're probably safe.

Exception to this - would not apply if your work involved talking to potential bidders.

Note: I'm not a US securities lawyer, so don't rely on this advice to your detriment.

Those who can, do. Those who can't, post threads about how to do it on WSO.
 

What are you a fucking idiot? As are all the people responding to you.

How much money you'd make is irrelevant. How much attention you'd attract is meaningless. You're not being anywhere close to too vague... this is the dumbest fucking thing I've ever heard and I assume its a troll because no one can be stupid enough to think this would be a good idea.

Also, just to be clear, the fact that you think these are really great companies means absolutely jack shit. You don't know your asshole from your elbow. The first set of spit shined executives that cross your path and suddenly its stellar company and a once in a lifetime investment opportunity worth taking a stupid risk on for what will almost certainly be a negative return. Get a life kid.

 

I think CFA guidelines would consider that to be insider trading, though the mosaic theory as someone mentioned could also apply

"I am not sure who this 'Anonymous' person is - one thing is for certain, they have been one hell of a prolific writer" - Anonymous
 

I think you obviously should learn two things from everyone's post: Call the compliance dept, and if you saw non-public info, no matter how trivial it is, it could easily be construed as insider trading. If you aren't sure, don't trade. Plenty of decent companies with good management to buy if that is your schtick.

"Decide what to be and go be it." - The Avett Brothers
 

@"stay thirsty my friends" Talk to compliance as they will be able to ascertain your exact situation and advise you accordingly. It's not something worth taking a chance on. I'd re-iterate @"Disjoint".

Furthermore, how much money could you possibly have lying around as an intern? Good management is just one piece of the puzzle, while harsh... @"Marcus_Halberstram" makes a fair point, especially in light of the legal line you are walking.

 
Cartwright:
Insider trading is extremely nebulous and difficult to prove. If you aint cheating, you aint trying.

i sat in on some classes on insider trading and its pretty sacry.. I can show a market and it can be a complete joke.... but just showing a market to hint that something is nice to buy/sell is against the law. it also sucked cause the lawyer used real examples and many of the people he talked about worked with us at some point in our careers

 

Yes - unless you are SEC, FSA registered or you have the CFA or ever plan on getting it. So let's say you are in Timbuktu and they have no inside information rules, you would be allowed to trade on inside information if you are physically sitting there. Now if you ever plan on working in a civilised market, well that might be a bit harder...

 

Like the Pink Floyd reference in your username. Many have said on this site in the past, and I repeat it, you should err on the side of caution to look for any legal help from a bunch of posters on the internet. My thoughts are to avoid trading with the type of info you are talking about. I don't work for Apple, but I could sit back as a consumer and guess that Apple's new iPhone is going to hurt Samsung. I could even do my own research with patent office filings (public info) and try to find out what Apple is up to and try to trade based on that. But if I somehow had info that wasn't publicly available as to "why" the next iPhone is going to crush Samsung, I shouldn't trade on that, cause it would be deemed non-public. If I ever thought that my investing would be close to illegal, I would either question my company's legal/HR group, contact an attorney with questions, or avoid the trades altogether. You do not want to screw with the SEC. A guy that worked for my previous company sniffed out that the railroad he worked for was going to be bought by a hedge fund and bought a buttload of call options, and got members of his family to do the same. He didn't actually know that it was going to happen, but there were many signs and some info that he had from upper mgmt that pointed towards that conclusion. He ended up being prosecuted by the SEC and had to pay lots of fines to avoid jail time. His career is all but over. The SEC tends to go after the easy cases where they are guaranteed a prosecution, or firms that will just settle and deny any wrongdoing. Unless you are a CEO and can somehow blame it on a Jr. Employee, or you're a member of Congress, the SEC will come after you and probably win.

"Decide what to be and go be it." - The Avett Brothers
 

Depends how you received the tip. Basically unless it was in person with no witnesses, they can prove you at least had the potential for insider trading and that, combined with your trades, will be a red flag and you gonna get locked up.

Also - if you keep making trades in companies a few days before they shoot up big, this will be suspicious. Even worse if they are tiny companies which are the ones usually subject to large movements.

 

Stephen fucking Cohen is on the block at this point.....what makes you think you're going to beat the system.

It doesn't fucking matter what your opinion on insider trading is.

If you get caught, you're going to federal pound me in the ass prison.

.....is that cut and dry enough for you?

How does this topic keep coming up?

Get busy living
 

The very first thing that happens when you get hired at a financial institution is market abuse training. They tell you all sorts of things about the FSA (now FCA). They tell you about the various cases that the FSA has prosecuted recently etc, such as this one: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-14/lodestone-s-whyte-said-among-f…

The one thing that they tell you that is the most striking is that for investigations that the FSA pursues there is, effectively, no presumption of innocence. I don't mean literally, but here's what happens: if the FSA suspects you of wrongdoing, you get arrested; the FSA subsequently conducts an investigation into your activities, which could potentially take years; during this time you're not allowed to work and are required to live on an allowance of arnd 40 quid/week.

The idea is that even if they don't have proof, they can and will make your life hell.

 

If you're consistently placing large volume trades where the trades represent most or all of your account, you will eventually get dinged (this might take a while because the SEC is so busy looking at porn that you might skate by for a while). If, however, you are placing smaller trades as a % of your account as part of a diversified portfolio and not using options, you will probably be in the clear.

I'm not condoning this, but if you're wondering, insider trading is rampant in the stock market. All you have to do is watch prices for a while to know that. There is one stock in particular I follow that always trades up or down >10% within 3-4 days of the quarter and the direction is magically aligned EVERY TIME with whether they are going to beat or miss the quarter. I have no idea who is doing the trading, but I assume they are getting info directly from mgmt. Company reports tomorrow and the stock surged up on no news late last week, good thing because I own some >.>

 

I believe it depends on the volume. Your trading history will usually reveal a pattern, and if there is a large spike in that pattern then there are grounds for suspicion.

 

In addition to all that has already been said. All the bulge brackets and I would assume every other broker dealer have policies in place for employees to follow when completing transactions of securities. This includes holding period requirements, disclosures, approvals etc. If you do not follow these policies the bank can cancel the trades/liquidate the trades and donate gains to charity etc. and then terminate you, of course.

However, assuming you comply with the investment monitoring your bank does, odds of you getting caught the first time are exceedingly slim if it is for a small amount. The risk obviously grows as you do it more often and/or with more money.

Frank Sinatra - "Alcohol may be man's worst enemy, but the bible says love your enemy."
 

If the information on which you're trading is matierial (i.e. information will result in stock price movement) and non-public, then you're insider trading. There really isn't a more flagrant violation of these rules than receiving a tip from an insider, so basically you're asking only whether you will be caught, which depends on a multitude of things.

If you've had your account open a while and have traded using a certain strategy since inception, you will draw attention to yourself if that strategy drastically changes (especially if it proves highly profitable). It's similar to your bank knowing when your card has been stolen when they see irregular patterns in your spending--if you drop $1000 in a foreign country multiple times in a week, your bank will probably start asking questions. If you buy 2300 shares of AAPL 1 day before a merger is announced, people will probably be asking questions. Conversely, if you open a new account and within a week are placing $1MM block trades with no diversification, you're setting yourself up for questioning.

Like any crime, whether you're caught is subjective. You could just as easily ask, "if I murder someone, but cover my tracks, I won't get in trouble right?!??" Depends how good you are at it and whether the authorities want to waste their resources pursuing your white collar ass. Based on the vagueness of your post though, I would assume this is not a good idea for you to pursue.

 

Regulators are pretty good at monitoring these types of things. I remember reading something on dealbreaker about a GS account in Switzerland that traded a shit ton of call options on Heinz just before they announced their deal with Buffet.

People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for freedom of thought which they seldom use.
 

You'll get hit with it. For training they gave this exact scenario where the trade is executed through a brokerage account, not necessarily directly through you. Still pops up on their radars. In fact, trade amounts much smaller can show up, even with a few thousand dollars.

 

I disagree. The SEC is NOT good at catching this. Insider trading is rampant. At a minimum Reg FD is "optional" for most companies, where mgmt. gives better or more information to large existing shareholders they like (this is an obvious conflict of interest to keep the shares high). If the fund then buys more or even just holds the stock, they are guilty of insider trading, however this will never be prosecuted.

What the government does catch is morons who buy $200K worth of options the day before a merger and whales who pay people $1mm to tell them something of worth (like that fat guy from Galleon). Don't do those things, you will go to jail.

 

There's limited upside and significant downside. The regulators might not catch you at first, but you might just do enough on your own to put yourself in their crosshairs. It's hard to maintain discipline when it comes to these things. Besides, it's not like hot tips pan out 100% of the time.

The wisdom of Uncle Eddie from another thread:

Edmundo Braverman:

It's less alpha than you might think. I've had plenty of "hot tips" in my day, and more often than not they don't pan out. And I'm not just talking about the ones that ended up being false. I'm talking about the ones that ended up being true and still had no material impact on the stock price. If you made a career of trading on inside information, you'd go broke pretty quick.

//www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/why-do-outside-investors-flee-from-insid…
 
Ravenous:

There is one stock in particular I follow that always trades up or down >10% within 3-4 days of the quarter >.>

Umm... hook a brother up.

It is of interest to note that while some dolphins are reported to have learned English -- up to fifty words used in correct context -- no human being has been reported to have learned dolphinese.
 

I think this is all very gray area, and basically the clear cut situation of illegal would be KNOWING the market move, but knowing some sort of indirect info that may or may not result in a market move is gray area. Knowing that GM is buying more supplies or setting up larger orders for the summer does not guarantee or even come close to assuring their financial results will improve, nor does even knowing they are going to have more revenue assure an increased stock price etc. I'm fairly certain a lot of this is case by case.

Still not sure if I want to spend the next 30+ years grinding away in corporate finance and the WSO dream chase or look to have enough passive income to live simply and work minimally.
 

FT had a long piece on insider trading today

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bbc0ee56-5dfa-11df-8153-00144feab49a.html

Not completely germane to your question, but it may help to get a feel for it. In general, if you're worried something's insider trading, it's probably better to ask compliance than to take a chance on the FSA/SEC busting in to your house at 5 am and taking your kids' iPhones.

Also, trading for your personal account is a major no-no at many asset managers.

 

Its illegal, because think about what you said " if a company knows it has some bad financial results coming up" (see: non public info) That constitutes to insider trading.

The answer to your question is 1) network 2) get involved 3) beef up your resume 4) repeat -happypantsmcgee WSO is not your personal search function.
 
blackfinancier:
Its illegal, because think about what you said " if a company knows it has some bad financial results coming up" (see: non public info) That constitutes to insider trading.

I figured that was the default response, but the company itself can't take any actions if it knows it has bad news coming up? I actually got the idea by reviewing the WSO ibanking interview guide, page 26 - Q. why would a company sell stock rather than issue debt? A. "if it thinks its stock price is inflated" (and other reasons mentioned).

I also thought this would be somehow wrong, but just wanted to check.

 

A company must have some basis for thinking its stock price is inflated. I would say it would be hard to prove itself innocent of using non-public information in its decision to issue stock, since the decision was likely (possibly?) made by those in possession of material, non-public information. Seems like an interesting gray area... unless the people in a position to make the decision to sell shares are behind a firewall - is that typically the case?

 

Of course it could come from the psychology side. I am just saying it would be hard to prove that if called out on it, especially when in possession of so much non-public information. Not to mention the efficient markets argument - if investors all think a stock is inflated, it would deflate, so the management team at the company must disagree with the markets (obviously since it thinks stock is inflated). So my point is that if you are in possession of insider info and choose to disagree with the markets, it looks very shady. No?

 

I agree with you - selling shares of your own company does not send a good signal to the market (because the markets are irrational) - otherwise you just could argue that the company has a more profitable investment opportunity. but selling shares is never seen positive.

öÖö
 
ivoteforthatguy:
It should short an ETF that has the company stock and go long every other share in the ETF. It will be 10 years before the SEC catches on.
they've caught on to ETF stripping in a rather big way unfortunately.
If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses - Henry Ford
 
leveRAGE.:
Are you sure they haven't been announced?? Its very strange he would tell ANYONE this info, let alone a prospective interviewee

At the boutique I summered at (10~ people), one of my principals regularly did that kind of stuff to boast about his firm, even to this new secretary they were interviewing for. He didn't see anything wrong with it, and just wanted to let people know what deals they were working on. He tried to be vague but anyone with a few minutes and google could tell the information was private.

 
futurectdoc:
It would be insider trading as the definition is trading on material, non-public information. If your spouse suddenly made uncharacteristic purchases prior to an acquisition they might notice.

But how so? If my spouse decided to drop 50K via a thinkorswim, etrade or w.e. frickin brokerage how would the SEC know? Especially if she has a separate account from me? How would the SEC know 2 people are married and share material information?

 
WesTrader:
Good rule of thumb when it comes to insider trading: if you have to ask, you shouldn't be doing it.

I'm not saying I would do it per se but definitely not with an institutional investor. When a HF or what have you takes a position at a firm, the SEC notices because those are large positions. But between family members, the sums will probably so small in the context of several $100 - $1000 mm deals and capitalization companies, who cares? It doesn't seem like its possible to track. Someone, somewhere definitely been capitalizing on this.

 
prudentinvestor:
But what if two people are married. One works in IB and the other does something completley non-finance related such as working as a programmer. If the indvidual told his/her spouse about an upcoming acquisition and the spouse purchased shares of the target, knowing the share values will increase is it still insider trading? Technically, the whole family is better off but the couple could have seperate brokeage/savings accounts. Is it possible for the SEC to find out about this, I assume no.

Where is the line drawn?

I see your question as "Is it insider trading if the SEC can't prove it?". Consider Preet Bharara on notice.

 

In Australia related parties is fixed in statute, under the Corps act.

A 'related party' is generally seen as: -a company that controls the public company or RE; -any officers or employees of the public company or RE or of the company that controls the public company or RE; -the spouses, parents and children of officers or employees; and -any entity controlled by any of the entities or persons listed above.

The rules against those sorts of actions are governed by the Market integrity rules and I imagine the USA have a very simular system. They would be all over that business in a heart beat, and the regulatory body doesn't need proof to cancel someone's financial services license, it would probably sit on the balance of probabilities, because it's a civil penalty, not a criminal penalty. I'm speculating about a lot of this, so don't quote me on it, but the systems they use to pick these things up are ridiculously sophisticated.

The IB should have signed very strict Independence guidelines and the investor should have disclosed their investments and their family's names, details and investments when they signed. These things are monitored and watched, and its not worth the risk of getting caught.

 

MNPI also has to involve a breach of duty. If the banker has a duty to keep information confidential, then sharing that creates tipper liability. Basically, if you overhear a conversation in a bar or happen to be walking down the street and a pitchbook falls off a truck, you're in the clear. The party providing the information needs to have breached a duty by sharing it. In talking with employees, there is a slippery slope. If you walk into every Starbucks location and ask the barista how many lattes they have sold and use that to trade, it would be considered doing due diligence, but if you get that information from senior management, it's breaking the law.

 

You should not have had shares of A in the first place. If you found yourself in this situation, I would suggest speaking with a lawyer. Probably selling out ASAP would be best.

The chain does not end anywhere - even if you purchase company Z you are still doing it based on inside information. No gray area here.

 

Wow... way to be convoluted about your questions... Please, correct me if I'm wrong here, but you work for an advisory firm that is advising a firm (Henceforth: FirmCo) on its expansion. In working with FirmCo, you see that they are hiring a contractor (Henceforth: BuildCo) to do the construction. Those are the only facts that are in stone.

1) I can reasonably believe that you would know who BuildCo is, but I don't see how you would know that BuildCo is definiatively using a specific supplier? In the same vein, how do you know that the supplier is getting its power from a certain energy provider? 2) With respect to your second question, who is your employer and how are they monitoring your personal accounts? 3) In the same vein as question 2, how much of FirmCo do you own?

Come back with some answers or clarify and maybe I can offer a minute amount of guidance.

 

Dr. Joe,

Not entirely... you're assuming you know the entire supply chain. That's like me saying I'm an advisor to a firm that is expanding their supply chain infrastructure. Among the investments, they have form a partnership or contract with ShippingCo to do their shipping. All I know is that ShippingCo truckers need to buy gas and they could buy it from one of a few major vendor. I can't own any of the major vendors as a result because it's a conflict of interest. I mean, at some point (in this case, with ShippingCo), the absolute insider knowledge ends, making it okay to purchase shares in another company. When you deal with Insider Information, it's a matter of what is considered Material Non-Public and what is not. Knowing BuildCo buys its gas from Exxon is non-material information but knowing that BuildCo has a major contract with US Steel to supply its steel is Material Non-Public.

To the OP, how did you aquire shares in FirmCo?

 
Frieds:
Dr. Joe,

Not entirely... you're assuming you know the entire supply chain. That's like me saying I'm an advisor to a firm that is expanding their supply chain infrastructure. Among the investments, they have form a partnership or contract with ShippingCo to do their shipping. All I know is that ShippingCo truckers need to buy gas and they could buy it from one of a few major vendor. I can't own any of the major vendors as a result because it's a conflict of interest. I mean, at some point (in this case, with ShippingCo), the absolute insider knowledge ends, making it okay to purchase shares in another company. When you deal with Insider Information, it's a matter of what is considered Material Non-Public and what is not. Knowing BuildCo buys its gas from Exxon is non-material information but knowing that BuildCo has a major contract with US Steel to supply its steel is Material Non-Public.

To the OP, how did you aquire shares in FirmCo?

I guess I should have mentioned that I implicitly assumed that you are buying the shares of company Z expecting your insider information to pan out and result in a windfall for Z. I thought the original question was posed as such, and in that situation, I don't think it matters how long the chain is - if you are using a bunch of public info as a link from your insider info to company Z, then you are in trouble.

I could be wrong, but this seems to make sense.

 

Assumptions aside, does anyone here actually know the rules on this? Can I own shares of a company that profits based on the performance of a company doing a transaction? How many degrees of separation does there have to be, and how sophisticated is the enforcement?

Get busy living
 

UFO, it really depends on the degree of seperation and the information available. I got sidetracked a while ago and couldn't answer properly, but it comes down to the question of what is considered Material information.

Using the FirmCo/BuildCo example, there are three possibilities. We're going to assume that the building are being built with Steel and that the company providing the Steel is going to be PTSC - Publicly Traded SteelCo.

Case 1: The OP, as an employee of AdvisorCo, knows FirmCo is using BuildCo for their expansion. BuildCo publicly announced prior to the start of Construction and intial ordering of materials, that they are now in contract with PTSC to be their sole provider of Steel. Despite not knowing about BuildCo's upcoming project for FirmCo, PTSC stands to reep massive windfall gains on this deal. Even though the deal with PTSC is publicly available, If the OP buys shares of PTSC on the basis of that they are supplying BuildCo their Steel for FirmCo's project, that would be insider trading. It falls on the grounds of Insider Trading because Material Non-Public Information, that is essential information that has not been publicly announced, about FirmCo's potential expansion and contractor are being used as the deciding factor for the purchase of PTSC.

Case 2: AdvisorCo gets to look over FirmCo's expansion plans and is in discussion with BuildCo about the financial constraints and budget estimates. As a result of this, the OP is privy to the fact that they will be buying PTSC for this project because they are the only Steel Company who can provide the specific type of Steel they need for this project. PTSC hasn't announced that they are parterningn with BuildCo, so the only people that know of this are the AdvisorCo team, FirmCo, BuildCo and PTSC. If the OP, knowing that PTSC was going to be the supplier of Steel for BuildCo, purchased shares of PTSC, he would be trading on Insider Information because everything about this trade is being executed on a high degree of Material Non-Public Information.

Case 3: The OP, aware of FirmCo's expansion and the construction being done by BuildCo buys shares in PTSC on the basis that they are one of the possible suppliers for BuildCo with no discernable proof or knowledge that they are that would indicate an insider having any certainty behind a proposed deal.

Both Case 1 and Case 2 also qualify for the Misappropriation Theory, as insider information is the basis for the decisions. Case 3 is trickier to prove, as you hit the degrees of seperation and could be permissable. At that point, I would check with your compliance officer to see if buying Steel is a conflicted interest.

 

Also, the date at which you previously acquired the stock would be crucial. For example if you purchased 20k shares of company A prior to working on any advisory role for company A you cant be accused of insider trading for new material of which you learn while consulting for them. However on the filp side you cant sell your holdings with out comming into conflict with insider trading laws. I would suggest you contact the SEC and see what you can and can not do if you want to liquidate your holding. Not every purchase or sale of stock while you have acces to inside information is considered insider trading, the intent to make fradulent gains must be present.

Follow the shit your fellow monkeys say @shitWSOsays Life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid - John Wayne
 

Libero quibusdam enim quia ut et enim facere. Deserunt est sit nostrum fugit. Molestiae et eligendi voluptas qui reprehenderit animi.

Eos fugit delectus quos consequatur occaecati et facilis. Ut quia quia et. Dolor eaque sint in ut voluptas consequatur dolores.

Aut molestiae molestiae adipisci quas odio expedita non. Est tempora rerum ut aut. Quod nulla reiciendis et voluptatem cumque odio rerum.

Eum doloribus nihil eos magni quisquam ipsum enim. Sint modi rerum blanditiis nisi.

Men are so simple and so much inclined to obey immediate needs that a deceiver will never lack victims for his deceptions. -Niccolo Machiavelli
 

Cupiditate id vel eius deleniti earum. Sit nam sint nisi ut voluptatem. Iste omnis doloribus sit enim consequatur. Aut quia doloribus ut corporis. Perferendis reprehenderit recusandae aut magnam et velit. Et esse repellat qui quo autem nobis aut enim. Reiciendis est earum maiores.

Eos fugiat quam aut modi voluptatem quia modi. Vel maxime aperiam aliquid eveniet nihil. Nulla cumque autem fugit omnis enim.

Get busy living
 

Et sit repellat dicta iusto omnis totam et. Occaecati ipsam veniam amet debitis voluptatibus id ullam iste. Consequuntur dolorum debitis modi omnis autem quaerat consequuntur.

Pariatur illo eligendi reprehenderit totam rerum aperiam. Facilis distinctio sit qui repellendus beatae veniam.

Qui voluptatem suscipit saepe incidunt. Quasi ex quia voluptatem qui ipsam. Illum nemo voluptate mollitia sed eligendi est. Est odit maxime culpa nihil sit ut. Iste exercitationem atque velit officia.

Iusto est debitis ad id aut ratione soluta. Amet laudantium ut aut magnam dolorem. At dignissimos deleniti sit ullam ipsum temporibus quam. Iure expedita consectetur provident. Provident necessitatibus illum mollitia saepe. Sed minus blanditiis numquam reiciendis beatae incidunt.

 

Molestias dicta id est ut quia sed. Non error eligendi iusto quia suscipit qui aut. Doloremque minus deleniti porro magni molestias tempore quibusdam. Necessitatibus ut provident esse a totam qui rerum. Aut repellat id eos ex adipisci. Sunt nesciunt sit perferendis excepturi temporibus et.

Tempore nulla incidunt ad enim blanditiis. Voluptas ab nostrum sint velit dolorem placeat rerum. Molestiae deleniti eum ut mollitia cum sequi beatae. Tenetur est illo omnis at cumque. Neque aliquid totam delectus quis. Ea possimus et praesentium sapiente.

 

Vitae nihil aut deserunt cum eaque incidunt sint. Velit vel enim eos ipsa. Inventore voluptas sapiente voluptatibus odit illo quibusdam. Praesentium aut ipsam eos voluptas.

Praesentium id et non est aut et quo fugiat. Enim distinctio occaecati deserunt ea rerum dolores. Et quod quisquam placeat aut omnis. Perferendis ratione laboriosam autem dolore. Qui ea illo repellat veniam ut molestiae sequi voluptate. Error repellat enim deleniti vitae voluptas dolorem id. Deserunt optio atque quisquam occaecati vitae nulla hic est.

Aut id sed et atque fugit laboriosam blanditiis. Occaecati ducimus quaerat commodi voluptas. Et sequi est voluptas libero repellat. Sint et enim molestiae.

Unde placeat quibusdam veritatis sit voluptatem sint. Ut praesentium velit non.

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (202) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (144) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
6
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
bolo up's picture
bolo up
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”