KKR PE straight out of undergrad vs top BB?

Have an offer to a GS/MS top group. Have to respond to them by end of next week otherwise I lose that group.

Just got invited to a KKR PE superday early next week. Let's assume that I ll get the offer otherwise this discussion is moot.

For those who don't know KKR just rolled out a PE analyst program this year. It is a 2 year track with no guarantee of promotion to associate at the end. Let's just assume that this will be a 2 and out program.

Which offer would you recommend? I don't have a lot of time to decide so I thought to post this as soon as I could. A bit of context - my goal has always been to go to PE but I saw myself joining as an Associate rather than an analyst so that I could go to b-school right after. Secondly I asked about what the work would be like as a PE analyst in my first round at KKR, and they said analysts would be very involved in the process just like Associates. When I asked about technical and modeling exposure - the answer I got was less convincing. I asked for a comparison with BX's PE analyst program, they said it would be less technically intensive and more 'diversified'. To me that sounds like I might be stuck doing a lot of qualitative, administrative and due diligence type work?

I like my top BB top group offer. But at the same time it is KKR (holy grail of PE) and I wonder if passing up on a KKR PE offer will be a huge mistake. It definitely seems to me that breaking in now will be easier than breaking in later.

Sorry for the long post, but the end question is this. Should I go the safe route - 2 years of top banking experience? Or should I go with 2 years of the KKR PE analyst experience? If I go with KKR, what will I do after 2 years? Will it be hard to find a job as an Associate at another top MF without having banking experience? Will it limit my exit opps? Would it be risky to join the first ever class of KKR PE analysts without any clear idea of whether the program will be successful? I am not sure if KKR has a clear vision for this program.

Just wanted to hear everyone's thoughts (Certified Users preferred). Thank you!

Comments (100)

 
Sep 5, 2013 - 4:05pm

very easy answer. You go to KKR, tell them the offer you have and they get back to you quick. If you get the offer, you absolutely take it. Any PE firm will take a KKR PE analyst for an associate position. Why would they not? This is the simplest answer. You're over thinking it way too much.

I would take a PE analyst position at LGP, Silverlake, BX or anywhere good over any banking job.

"Look, you're my best friend, so don't take this the wrong way. In twenty years, if you're still livin' here, comin' over to my house to watch the Patriots games, still workin' construction, I'll fuckin' kill you. That's not a threat, that's a fact.
 
Sep 5, 2013 - 4:21pm

Will Hunting:

very easy answer. You go to KKR, tell them the offer you have and they get back to you quick. If you get the offer, you absolutely take it. Any PE firm will take a KKR PE analyst for an associate position. Why would they not? This is the simplest answer. You're over thinking it way too much.

I would take a PE analyst position at LGP, Silverlake, BX or anywhere good over any banking job.

This sounds well reasoned to me. It will be a learning curve for headhunters and b-schools, but KKR is KKR.

"For I am a sinner in the hands of an angry God. Bloody Mary full of vodka, blessed are you among cocktails. Pray for me now and at the hour of my death, which I hope is soon. Amen."
 
Sep 5, 2013 - 4:11pm

KKR have lame business cards. This should be taken into consideration. Seriously though, your lifestyle in PE won't be any worse than banking, and probably better.

"After you work on Wall Street it’s a choice, would you rather work at McDonalds or on the sell-side? I would choose McDonalds over the sell-side.” - David Tepper
 
Sep 5, 2013 - 4:41pm

I am definitely very excited about PE. But I have heard the top candidates (I go to a target and have seen several kids turn down even interviews from very good PE shops with established undergrad analyst programs like Silver lake and Leonard Geen for their offers at Goldman). Makes me wonder whether the analyst role in PE is not that great or prestigious? Maybe all the important work only goes to the post banking anlaysts?

Also I browsed the WSO forum for more information and found several people echo that moving from PE to PE is difficult without banking experience. Can anyone who joined PE right out of undergrad please comment?

Another point - hours and lifestyle are not a consideration. My BB offer is at a group which works you like a dog so I am ready for the worst anyways. Pay is also not a consideration. I care about the experience, exit opps and the impact on my resume

 
Sep 5, 2013 - 5:17pm

This is difficult but I'm leaning towards the banking gig. Part of it comes down to how risk adverse you are.

My big issue with the KKR offer is that the program is so new. You're essentially acting as a guinea pig for KKR and lots of things could go wrong. The Partners have no idea how to handle an extra layer of junior employees. You know nothing about PE, so obviously you'd be assigned pretty menial tasks to start. However, fresh analysts out of banking will also be new to the job looking to take on a lot of the responsibilities you'd want. Who gets what work? This is an easy question to answer when you have a structured program that has existed for years, but KKR doesn't. On the other hand, Goldman has been cranking out analysts and placing them into PE shops for years and years and years. It is a very defined experience and you know the outcome is going to be great for you.

There are a ton of other factors beyond job responsibilities that go into this. KKR really doesn't know if they are going to use their analyst program as a feeder to their post-banking/pre-MBA program. They may decide that after two years your experience isn't as good as the analyst at Goldman and send you packing. Without a track record of outplacement, you may end up at another great PE shop and you may not. Really hard to say. I'd like to think that you'd have tremendous opportunities available to you, but I can't with 100% confidence.

These aren't huge issues or even reasons NOT to take the KKR job. It is probably one of the best jobs you can possibly get out of undergrad. However, I just don't think the upside potential (stay at KKR?) offsets the risks you'd be taking by being one of the first people to go through their program.

CompBanker

 
Sep 5, 2013 - 5:33pm

Kind of have to agree with Compbanker on this one...if it was any other bank besides a top BB, I'd probably say go KKR straight out of undergrad just for the stamp on the resume, but you get that with Goldman as well and with a more defined path.

The other factor that should weigh in your decision is your own background...are you already proficient at modeling and a finance/accounting double major or a kid with a liberal arts background that will have a tough time around a balance sheet?

If it's the latter, all the more reason to go with Goldman...if you are more of the former and can build LBO models in your sleep, I might lean to KKR here to avoid 2 years of utter pain.

 
Sep 5, 2013 - 5:32pm

Have to agree with CompBanker on this one--take the banking gig.

While KKR is KKR, you have no idea how the analyst experience will be like. You may build LBOs or you may be a glorified secretary, but with no precedent you'll never know.

If you're truly at a top group (GS TMT, MS M&A) then you KNOW what the experience will be like, and you KNOW (within reason) what you're exit opps will be like. So there's really no definitive upside to taking KKR.

Just my 2 cents.

 
Sep 5, 2013 - 5:47pm

The upside here is that perhaps KKR PE will give me better MF opportunities than GS TMT/M&A? That's what I want to find out. Because I looked at the placement of GS TMT/MS M&A, and its seems that of late the elite boutiques have been kicking ass. We did have people go MF, but it was certainly not enough to let me claim that anything like KKR / BX / TPG will be a shoo in.

 
Sep 5, 2013 - 5:37pm

I know that this is at least the second year of the program, as I know a person from my target that went directly to KKR last year (as in started this past July). I'd imagine it'll be comparable to BX and Silver Lake PE. Don't take my word for it though, I'm still a student.

If I were you, I'd reach out to some new analysts and see what they say.

 
Sep 5, 2013 - 5:39pm

What CompBanker said is exactly what I am afraid of. As for my background I am finance heavy on my background (and had a pretty solid internship performance), but definitely can't claim to have the ability to build LBOs in my sleep.

 
Sep 5, 2013 - 5:45pm

Stop being so risk averse. You have to think, "why not let it fly?"

Your heart clearly seems to be pointing you to KKR, you are being risk averse in a situation with very little downside, so why not swing the bat a little? Worst that could happen is you get 2 years at one of the most prestigious firms in the world.

Stop thinking of your life as a resume, take some risks.

 
Sep 5, 2013 - 5:49pm

I agree with WSO and compbanker's points fully but you also have to consider this: hours at KKR and other megafunds are just as bad as banking. You'd have to reasonably assume that many new associates fresh out of banking will be more than willing to pawn off a complex LBO to a starry eyed new analyst who is so eager to work through the weekend.

I believe there will be more than enough modeling, due diligence, random excel analysis to go around. With that being said, maybe I'm completely wrong. I do think that the benefit of the doubt should be that KKR on your resume would get you the same interviews at PE firms that any banking job would. At the very least, your superiors could put in a good word with you at every other PE firm for you.

"Look, you're my best friend, so don't take this the wrong way. In twenty years, if you're still livin' here, comin' over to my house to watch the Patriots games, still workin' construction, I'll fuckin' kill you. That's not a threat, that's a fact.
 
Sep 7, 2013 - 5:14pm

Will Hunting:

I agree with WSO and compbanker's points fully but you also have to consider this: hours at KKR and other megafunds are just as bad as banking


Lifestyle is much better. Can't speak for KKR in particular on this one but all-nighters are not commonplace at MFs and PE analysts should expect hours more along the lines of 9AM - 9/10PM.
 
Sep 7, 2013 - 5:30pm

turtles:

Will Hunting:

I agree with WSO and compbanker's points fully but you also have to consider this: hours at KKR and other megafunds are just as bad as banking

Lifestyle is much better. Can't speak for KKR in particular on this one but all-nighters are not commonplace at MFs and PE analysts should expect hours more along the lines of 9AM - 9/10PM.


This is completely incorrect.
 
Sep 5, 2013 - 6:00pm

derivstrading:

Stop being so risk averse. You have to think, "why not let it fly?"

Your heart clearly seems to be pointing you to KKR, you are being risk averse in a situation with very little downside, so why not swing the bat a little? Worst that could happen is you get 2 years at one of the most prestigious firms in the world.

Stop thinking of your life as a resume, take some risks.

Totally agree. Your goal is PE and you have a chance to start at one of the best PE firms. I consider this a low risk/high reward opportunity.
 
Sep 5, 2013 - 6:21pm

What is this high reward that people are attributing to working at KKR out of undergrad? If you're still in finance 2 years from now, you'll either still be either KKR or you'll be at another megafund--same place as your peers in top groups.

I see very little upside or downside to this. It really makes no difference in the long run.

The only risk is that you don't get any megafund offer when you recruit, which I find unlikely since you seem like a reasonably intelligent guy at a top group. You'd be surprised at how many people at GS/MS/BX are really not that smart at all...

 
Sep 5, 2013 - 6:26pm

If your goal is PE and a megafund is giving you an opportunity then I think you go and tell them you have a GS/MS offer already standing but your goal is ultimately PE. Honestly, what are the chances this program won't be run well? It's KKR. They have their shit together. The whole impetus behind the program may be that they're sick of BB's competing to retain analysts, or make it difficult for them to interview.

In 5 years you may look back and think that there was no difference whatsoever between the paths and that you'd have ended up where you are regardless.

 
Sep 5, 2013 - 11:03pm

Couple things to possibly consider-

1. The lifestyle isn't as glamorous as it might appear to be- hours will be bad and comp isn't going to be associate comp (albeit still slightly better than banking comp)
2. Most importantly (and FWIW this is the reason I turned down an offer a PE offer and decided to accept banking (GS/MS/JP) instead- the hours at the banks are pretty brutal (with some group exceptions), but there is a ton of camaraderie amongst analysts that makes it much more manageable- at these MF PE shops that have analyst programs you tend to have a tiny handful of analysts and a much larger group of associates. As an analyst, in speaking with some people who have done it, you're not only doing different work from the associates, but you also are in a completely different stage in life from them, fresh out of college, and it is a much more isolating position than you might think. I'm sure many of you will say this is a stupid consideration, but it is 2 years of your life, definitely something I considered and something that bothered friends of mine who went straight to PE. That said, it is a pretty awesome opportunity, and I wouldn't be too worried about the 'success' of the KKR analyst program, as they are on top of their game and will put together something that is successful.

 
Sep 5, 2013 - 11:06pm

I have to say I'm a little surprised at the scepticism some people seem to have toward this. I'm an out-of-undergrad analyst at a megafund, a job for which I turned down another megafund and a top BB. Just like you, I had been very interested in doing PE for a while, but thought I'd have to do banking first like everyone else. Nevertheless, when it came to decision time, it really was a no-brainer for me to dump the banking gig.

Obviously the fact that KKR's program is new is somewhat of a consideration, but I seriously doubt it would be anything other than stellar. I'm not familiar with it, so in what follows I assume it's a pure PE analyst program like the more established ones at other megafunds instead of some rotational back-office careerkiller.

In my opinion, the work is much more interesting and obviously a lot more applicable to PE, since, well, it is PE. Do you really think you'll be better prepared for a job at KKR by working 2 years at a bank, thinking like a banker vs. working at KKR analysing investments, weeding through banker and consultant bullshit as a contributing member of a deal team? Yes, you will most likely get less training and handholding than you would at a bank, so it's probably not the job for treehuggers or surrender-monkeys, but no one's going to expect you to build a 50-tab LBO model from scratch on day one.

The hours are generally either the same, marginally better or a lot better, depending on which PE firm you're comparing with which BB group. The comp difference to banking is significant and probably more than most people think. The perks are also better.

For me deciding between the PE firms was more difficult since the programs and comp structures were different - in the end I chose to go to the firm I felt I fit in better at culturally. The only real negative point vs banking for me was the social side, since you don't have the large analyst class to go out with, but if you have your own network it's not a problem at all.

So, in your position, like with any interview process involving an exploding offer, I'd tell them about the deadline to reply and just do the superday. You'll have a chance to ask more questions about how they're thinking of structuring the program and get a better feel for what the role entails.

Regardless, I'm happy about the momentum this thread has managed, as most other comparison threads like this just end up with "get an offer first" / "dream on" type comments, as if no serious contender for these jobs would ever waste their time on WSO. The thing is that no one who actually has an offer can ask these questions, since the pool is so small that it's almost impossible to retain anonymity, so in the end there's very little valuable advice on the site.

  • 3
 
Sep 6, 2013 - 12:27am

Cruncher:

I have to say I'm a little surprised at the scepticism some people seem to have toward this. I'm an out-of-undergrad analyst at a megafund, a job for which I turned down another megafund and a top BB. Just like you, I had been very interested in doing PE for a while, but thought I'd have to do banking first like everyone else. Nevertheless, when it came to decision time, it really was a no-brainer for me to dump the banking gig.

Obviously the fact that KKR's program is new is somewhat of a consideration, but I seriously doubt it would be anything other than stellar. I'm not familiar with it, so in what follows I assume it's a pure PE analyst program like the more established ones at other megafunds instead of some rotational back-office careerkiller.

In my opinion, the work is much more interesting and obviously a lot more applicable to PE, since, well, it is PE. Do you really think you'll be better prepared for a job at KKR by working 2 years at a bank, thinking like a banker vs. working at KKR analysing investments, weeding through banker and consultant bullshit as a contributing member of a deal team? Yes, you will most likely get less training and handholding than you would at a bank, so it's probably not the job for treehuggers or surrender-monkeys, but no one's going to expect you to build a 50-tab LBO model from scratch on day one.

The hours are generally either the same, marginally better or a lot better, depending on which PE firm you're comparing with which BB group. The comp difference to banking is significant and probably more than most people think. The perks are also better.

For me deciding between the PE firms was more difficult since the programs and comp structures were different - in the end I chose to go to the firm I felt I fit in better at culturally. The only real negative point vs banking for me was the social side, since you don't have the large analyst class to go out with, but if you have your own network it's not a problem at all.

So, in your position, like with any interview process involving an exploding offer, I'd tell them about the deadline to reply and just do the superday. You'll have a chance to ask more questions about how they're thinking of structuring the program and get a better feel for what the role entails.

Regardless, I'm happy about the momentum this thread has managed, as most other comparison threads like this just end up with "get an offer first" / "dream on" type comments, as if no serious contender for these jobs would ever waste their time on WSO. The thing is that no one who actually has an offer can ask these questions, since the pool is so small that it's almost impossible to retain anonymity, so in the end there's very little valuable advice on the site.

I think a couple of the key arguments here are overplayed and aren't looking at the whole picture.
1. The 2 years in banking not being as applicable as 2 years in PE -- sometimes you don't want the same experience in order to help you be successful in the next step. It's valuable to see how the bread is baked before you step on the other side and start negotiating with the people you used to work with. After 2 years in PE, you might have a really good grasp of what you need to do as an associate, but you might not be as well-rounded and knowledgeable enough about sellside processes.
2. Having your own networking being enough -- I think you're really underestimating how impactful the social aspect is. The network, should you choose to capitalize on it, is huge, and you'd be surrounded by hundreds of your peers who are all smart and sociable. It's one of the best experiences of being an analyst.

With that being said, I'd still lean slightly towards going to KKR. The brand name alone can carry you as far as you want IMO.

 
Sep 6, 2013 - 1:18am

I can at least confirm that a fair number of target undergrads have been turning down offers / interviews for analyst programs at BX / SL / etc. in favor of offers in IB at GS / MS / BX / EVR / GHL / etc. Might be overly paranoid, but it's certainly a trend I've noticed. OP isn't insane to at least have some concern.

Quite frankly: these are both top-notch opportunities. I'd go with the people you enjoy the most. I would probably lean towards KKR, but that's speaking as a current 2nd year IB analyst. One thing's for sure: I wouldn't want to be working underneath overworked former IB analysts who left for PE just to continue being overworked.

"For all the tribulations in our lives, for all the troubles that remain in the world, the decline of violence is an accomplishment we can savor, and an impetus to cherish the forces of civilization and enlightenment that made it possible."
 
Sep 6, 2013 - 5:37am

I'd take the banking offer. First off, whilst I know you said to ignore the fact that you don't actually have offers from both yet for the sake of conversation, you are risking something tangible and attractive for something else that is hugely competitive and you have no guarantee of attaining.

Secondly, at risk of coming across condescending, you are only just graduating from college and have never worked professionally in finance yet. Megafund PE may seem like the 'holy grail' now, but your perspective on things will develop hugely over the next year or so when you are actually working full-time and observing everything that goes on. You may discover that actually a long/short equity hedge fund is where you want to be, for instance. A top group at a great bank provides a fantastic foundation to go and do pretty much whatever you want: small-/mid-/large-cap PE, l/s equity, distressed, multi-strat hedge fund, etc.

Yes, the banking option is going to be hard work, but you only have to do it for a year or so, and you will gain more options having done so. If you still want to go to KKR at that point then you will still very much be able to, and you will also be able to enter as an Associate. I can't imagine life as an Analyst at KKR is an easy lifestyle choice, regardless. Furthermore, if you ever want to move out of PE then your banking experience will serve you well.

 
Sep 6, 2013 - 2:14pm

Murut:

I'd take the banking offer. First off, whilst I know you said to ignore the fact that you don't actually have offers from both yet for the sake of conversation, you are risking something tangible and attractive for something else that is hugely competitive and you have no guarantee of attaining.


Actually I will have both offers in hand when I decide so this is not a problem. KKR is aware of my standing BB offer and will provide me with a same day decision. So I don't need to lose out on my BB offer at all. Infact, my chances at KKR have probably never been better. This is an accelerated Superday so they haven't even yet looked at the resumes of other top candidates in my school who are going to apply via the regular application timeline. They expedited my process because of my BB offer deadline.

Two years from now, who knows what my chances will be at KKR? There are probably a 100 people in the top banking groups (BB,MM,EB) across the country and I am sure at least 50% of them will try to swing a MF. I will need to be in the top quartile of my group to even score an interview with KKR (and the talent pool in my BB group this year is very good I think).

Nevertheless many thanks for all your opinions. It seems like there was no clear consensus, which, perhaps oddy, relieves me in some way, because now I know there is no 'wrong' answer.

 
Sep 6, 2013 - 9:18pm

Assuming you're not trolling here, its rather naive to assume that you have the KKR offer locked up just because you have an accelerated superday.

In fact, this entire post is pretty naive. KKR is not begging to offer you a job and by posting on here you're putting your chances of getting the offer in jeopardy. PE is a small world and I'm sure someone at KKR that will be interviewing you has read this thread.

Best of luck in the interview. You'll probably need it

 
Sep 6, 2013 - 2:42pm

I agree with Murut and some of above posters. It'd seem to me that given your recent grad status, it'd be more beneficial in the long run to do something that allows for a broader path to follow. Granted, it is KKR; but two years is a long time. By the time that you are done with IB analyst stint, you could have changed your mind about doing PE altogether and may want to work at a HF for example, and having worked in IB will better afford you that opportunity among others.

People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for freedom of thought which they seldom use.
 
Sep 6, 2013 - 4:07pm

Here's another piece of info:

Check out Tiger Global's investment analysts. 3 of them are straight from Silverlake's PE ANALYST program. So it seems that if an elite HF like Tiger is willing to take a PE analyst from Silverlake, I'm sure other PE firms or elite HFs would be more than willing to take a former KKR analyst.

"Look, you're my best friend, so don't take this the wrong way. In twenty years, if you're still livin' here, comin' over to my house to watch the Patriots games, still workin' construction, I'll fuckin' kill you. That's not a threat, that's a fact.
  • 3
 
Sep 6, 2013 - 4:41pm

Errrr.... I dunno if its as obvious a decision as it may seem.

The reasons I think so are:
1. Many will argue otherwise, but the training you'll get in banking will help ALOT in PE; I would go so far as to say that you will be better trained with a more diverse and thorough set of skills after 2 years at a solid BB group than 2 years at KKR; reason being:
(a) you'll have much more formal training, an actual training program
(b) people will actually teach you stuff, theres a lot more hand holding in banking than in PE (none whatsoever) and as an analyst you need that
(c) you will see ALOT more transactions and deal activity in 2 years of banking vs. 2 years of PE; a shit load more. And you'll get to see a huge cross section of deal types, situational nuances etc... that you'll learn a lot from
2. You'll have access to the KKR opportunity in 2 years anyway, its not like you're turning your back on it and that door will be shut for you forever. If you can secure a KKR offer now, there's no reason why you can't secure multiple megafund offers in the future. And if you think "yeah but this is KKR, I'd rather go to KKR than Carlyle/Apollo"... contrary to popular belief, and you won't listen to this anyway, there is literally ZERO difference between the top 5 megafunds. BX, KKR, Carlyle, WP and Apollo. Obviously they each have their unique DNA and culture, but in terms of the experience/training/credentials/qualifications you'll have coming out of the associate program, zero difference.
3. Banking is more forgiving. You can fuck-up in backing. You can fuck around in banking. I personally would rather be learning in an environment thats more forgiving and more..... coddling, for lack for a better word.
4. Just because you do 2 years at KKR doesn't mean you'll be a better positioned candidate for PE after your program is up. Fact is, if they don't extend you an offer to stay on as an Associate, its because they don't think you're good. And when you're interviewing everyone will know that because they are simultaneously interviewing your supposedly "lesser" banker analyst contemporaries to fill the seat you weren't good enough to keep. Its also a bit of game theory. 2x2 grid: Go to KKR and Outperform, Go to KKR Underperform, Go to GS Outperform, Go to GS Underperform... in both GS TMT scenarios, 2 years out of school you may very well end up at a top MF in 2 years. In the KKR underperform, you don't know how much the lack of an offer to stay on will impact your MF chances. Keep in mind the few PE firms that hire out of UG... Silver Lake and Cerberus come to mind. Where did they end up after their 2 year programs? Most of the SL and Cerberus guys I know ended up going to "lesser" PE funds for whatever reason... and all of them interviewed at almost all the MF people on WSO drool over. Obviously the 2-3 people I know in this category are a small sample. But do your homework.

Last but not least, I think one of the most important is #5. Its an untested program. It may be a complete failure. They may realize that the kids they hire aren't nearly where they need them to be, in that case 2 years out, you're kind of fucked cuz you're not staying at KKR. And maybe you legitimately didn't get the proper training. Now you're even hindered from getting into the next top tier PE gig because you're first 2 years weren't quite up to par (I realize the hilarity/absurdity of saying a 2 year stint at KKR isn't 'par').

The main reason these guys are hiring junior people is because the PE recruiting process has and continues to be a complete fiasco. Its hard to get very solid candidates in a process that is irrational. Often times you're interviewing kids who are only a few months out of undergrad anyway, you give them an offer, they check out completely at work, learn very little over the next year and a half and show up for work bright eyes and bushy tailed and with a chip on their shoulders... but largely useless. The main reason MF recruit UG is because of how stupid the current recruiting process is coupled with the fact that even as a top tier MF, its very competitive recruiting top candidates. Hiring out of UG is a sure shot. You will get the absolute best candidate out there. There is little competition out there. They will almost always accept your offer. Hopefully they're good enough to keep around in 2 years, but if not you just cut them loose. And had you not hired that kid, he would have gone to GS TMT or MS M&A and either accepted an offer at a HF or MM PE fund before you started interviewing or turned your offer down for a competitor of yours... maybe because you couldn't get them an offer fast enough or maybe because that firm just sold him/her more.

Anyway,food for thought. Just a few perspectives. Regardless, going to KKR right out of UG is pretty ridiculous. Even if you are a schlub, you'll still have very solid opportunities coming out of there.

Array
  • 6
 
Best Response
Sep 6, 2013 - 6:46pm

Agree with Marcus. Look, I ended up in a very similar situation to you - summered at a top group (as in MS M&A / BX R&R / GS TMT), got a few MF analyst interviews, and got asked back to interview at three of them. I actually declined all of my interviews at that point and accepted the BB. Here's why:

1.) I don't come from a finance heavy background. I go to a HYPS, so my actual finance knowledge (right now) compared to a Georgetown/Ross/Stern kid is pretty low. I need the BB experience to really get me up to speed over a six month span, and I didn't want to waste my senior year learning finance instead of getting wasted. This may not be as applicable for you, since you said you come from a finance background.

2.) Related to (1), my modeling skills, in a word, suck. I'm not at all comfortable with modeling quickly, and obviously, that's key in PE. It sounds like you're more comfortable than me, but definitely not as comfortable as you'd like to be in a high pressure PE environment. All of the analysts/associates I talked to at the MFs said that they expect their analyst to already be black belts at modeling - they should be performing at 80-90% of what an associate does. Not sure about you, but that made me pause quite a bit. BB banking gives you such a strong base of financial modeling that I find it difficult to turn it down for an opportunity that won't teach me as well and will expect just as much, if not more, in terms of models/outputs. Be careful of chewing off more than you can bite.

3.) There's nobody checking your work in PE. That's the one refrain I heard again and again from my interviewers. Unlike banking, no one is going to check every output/line item in your models, and if you fuck up, there won't necessarily be an associate there to catch your mistake. For me, this was big. As I've said before, I'm not comfortable with being fast and error free, so there's jumping into a situation where there was little guidance AND little oversight seemed like a bad move. Not sure if you're somewhat similar, but somethiing to keep in mind.

4.) The EB thing versus the BB argument you mentioned doesn't make too much sense to me. Out of my group, if an analyst in the top 1/2 (which isn't hard since a few drop by the end of the first year anyway) wants an interview with a MF, he/she gets it. It's not even an issue. Given that you're also at a top group, I'm assuming it's the same. And at that point, it's your skills that will get you the job, and I think the BB environment and training will allow you to succeed.

5.) Fun. Honestly, being at my group was like doing homework problems at school, but for thousands of dollars. At the end of the day, you spend hours and hours with other young college kids, goofing around and working. If it wasn't for the analysts and the camraderie, I would go crazy in a work environment like BB banking/MF PE (I'm assuming). Don't underestimate how important this is for your sanity. Like you, I'm set on going BB --> PE --> greatness. And like you, I'm not concerned about working hard or money right now - I just want to set myself up for future success. But I can tell you, that attitude really starts to suffer when it's your sixth weekend in a row at the office and it's 3 am and no one else is there. And I'm assuming that last part will occur much more in PE than it would in banking.

Feel free to PM me if you want to hear more.

dollas
  • 7
 
Sep 6, 2013 - 10:47pm

Marcus_Halberstram:

Errrr.... I dunno if its as obvious a decision as it may seem.

And if you think "yeah but this is KKR, I'd rather go to KKR than Carlyle/Apollo"... contrary to popular belief, and you won't listen to this anyway, there is literally ZERO difference between the top 5 megafunds. BX, KKR, Carlyle, WP and Apollo.

No love for TPG, Bain, or GSCP?

 
Sep 12, 2013 - 10:47pm

Marcus typically makes good points but he's off here with the grouping of megafunds. KKR and Apollo are heads and shoulders above the other 3 funds mentioned and this is reflected in the past 2-3 recruiting cycles. A number of people with multiple offers chose to sign with KKR and Apollo over BX / TPG / WP / Carlyle. My guess is you work at one of these firms, probably WP.

KKR is still the symbol of private equity, and that is a huge draw for candidates. The prestige factor is too hard to ignore. Apollo pays more than everyone else, and promises a 8-9 year Partner track for incoming associates. This coupled with their recent performance during the recession (largely driven by their investment style to get their hands on hairy situations) make them a very attractive place for prospective candidates.

BX is a real estate firm at this point. It hasn't done a corporate LBO in quite a while (correct me if I'm wrong). Carlyle is way too scattered with 1000 different funds. WP dips their hands into too many different things (growth, late stage, etc), thus their Analysts get absolutely crushed (hence why they are hired as Analysts when their peers are referred to as Associates). Also had a lot of troubling filling their class, at least for the 2013 cycle, so they pre-amped for 2014.

 
Sep 12, 2013 - 11:37pm

bunkerbanker:

Marcus typically makes good points but he's off here with the grouping of megafunds. KKR and Apollo are heads and shoulders above the other 3 funds mentioned and this is reflected in the past 2-3 recruiting cycles. A number of people with multiple offers chose to sign with KKR and Apollo over BX / TPG / WP / Carlyle. My guess is you work at one of these firms, probably WP.

KKR is still the symbol of private equity, and that is a huge draw for candidates. The prestige factor is too hard to ignore. Apollo pays more than everyone else, and promises a 8-9 year Partner track for incoming associates. This coupled with their recent performance during the recession (largely driven by their investment style to get their hands on hairy situations) make them a very attractive place for prospective candidates.

BX is a real estate firm at this point. It hasn't done a corporate LBO in quite a while (correct me if I'm wrong). Carlyle is way too scattered with 1000 different funds. WP dips their hands into too many different things (growth, late stage, etc), thus their Analysts get absolutely crushed (hence why they are hired as Analysts when their peers are referred to as Associates). Also had a lot of troubling filling their class, at least for the 2013 cycle, so they pre-amped for 2014.

What about other megafunds like Bain or Apax, as well as top middle markets like Hellman?

 
Sep 13, 2013 - 12:37am

I don't believe I was ranking PE firms (the silliness of which I already addressed in this thread)... my point was that at the associate level if you end up at any one of the top few firms, the experience is largely fungible.

The the prestige factor of KKR -- and there certainly is one -- is valued most by those that work there. No business school adcom is like ohhh shit, we got a KKR kid here... dump all those Carlyle kids on the wait list. And the same can be said for any of the other supposed preceptors of KKR prestige. The difference between KKR and Carlyle is... yes, negligible. You're at the very upper echelons of finance, you're splitting hairs. All the benefits you think you will gain by working at a super-credentialed, prestigious and pedigreed place like KKR are also true for working at [insert top PE firm here].

I'd love to hear an example of a door which would be closed to you coming from BX, that would be wide open had you spent those 2 (seriously, 2) years at KKR.

Array
  • 1
 
Sep 13, 2013 - 3:03am

bunkerbanker:
BX is a real estate firm at this point. It hasn't done a corporate LBO in quite a while (correct me if I'm wrong). Carlyle is way too scattered with 1000 different funds. WP dips their hands into too many different things (growth, late stage, etc), thus their Analysts get absolutely crushed (hence why they are hired as Analysts when their peers are referred to as Associates). Also had a lot of troubling filling their class, at least for the 2013 cycle, so they pre-amped for 2014.

As for the BX point, I can attest to that. They even push recruits more towards the RE side of the business.

As for WP, I find that incredible strange to call your incoming guys Analysts. Additionally, though: WP has been building down business, especially for a lot of Satellite Offices.

I'm talking about liquid. Rich enough to have your own jet. Rich enough not to waste time. Fifty, a hundred million dollars, buddy. A player. Or nothing.

See my Blog & AMA

 
Sep 6, 2013 - 6:52pm

I think what Marcus_Halberstram said is a pretty good response to the opening post. If you go to KKR and fuck it up, you might be done with the private equity sector entirely, and I don't know what kind of skills you'd get from that which could be really useful in other areas. If you go rot in investment banking and fuck it up, you'll still be fine, because everyone knows it's a shitshow anyway. I guess to sum it up: high risk, high potential reward; lower risk, more of an upward climb but more flexibility. Just my three cents.

 
Sep 6, 2013 - 10:41pm

I think the camaraderie point is completely overblown in this thread. There seems to be this idea of a PE analyst all alone at 3am slaving away doing something completely meaningless because no one trusts them with any real responsibility since they lack the banking experience (or, alternatively, modelling something that's too difficult for them that they'll fuck up and get fired / not promoted for). What I've found actually happens is that you end up forming the camaraderie with the associates, especially the new ones (obviously with the other analysts as well, depending on how many your office has), and you do the same shit you would do in banking with other analysts - mess around on funny websites, complain about waiting around for comments from seniors or about sitting in the office when you want to be out clubbing, etc etc. Since you still work in teams, this has also meant that I've been working basically associate hours.

The job itself is basically a lite-version of the associate role - the things you work on are pretty much the same, but the scope of work is slightly narrower. You obviously start off with quite a bit less responsibility, but this ramps up as you gain experience and people start to trust you with producing quality work. Most, if not all, of the funds hire analysts with the goal to have them promoted at least to associates, so the firms naturally want to develop your skill set into one they can underwrite for an associate role - it's much less riskier for them to promote you than it is to source someone externally. In my experience they also follow through with this to a significant extent, with the vast majority of undergrad analysts staying on past the end of their contracts (so Marcus I'd say your sample seems to be quite skewed on the downside). The people who do leave end up at other PE shops, elite HFs, distressed shops, top MBAs, start-ups and so on. Some people do switch to MM funds, but I think it's difficult to draw conclusions between intentional downshifting and unsuccessful recruiting without knowing the people directly.

I also think people somewhat underestimate the technical difficulty level of interviews for these funds. Most IBD summer analysts finishing up their internships are severely unprepared, since you pretty much get the same questions as prospective associates with the bar for performance set a little lower (I prepped using a guide meant for PE associate interviews and found it to be at an appropriate level). This all means it's very unlikely that you would land an offer if your technical knowledge is not up to scratch already. It is also worth mentioning that if you do get an offer from KKR and reject it, good luck recruiting with them next year during your analyst program. These firms put a ton of effort into recruiting and only make very few offers - the fund I turned down was apparently pretty pissed off with my decision, so I doubt I would have any chance if for some reason I wanted to lateral to them in the next few years.

On a side note, I would like to point out that I also spent my senior year getting wasted.

  • 1
 
Sep 6, 2013 - 11:17pm

TPG is a shadow of its former self. Even among the elite, they cant all be winners... and TPG certainly isn't.

Bain is in a similar situation but didn't reach nearly the heights of TPG.

And the fact that you even mentioned GSCP makes me thing you're in some way linked to them and are trying to toot your own horn by mentioning them... which I know isn't the case. But imagine your skepticism if someone asks you to compare and contrast Oxford, Harvard and Chaplain University.

In all seriousness, GSCP isn't and never was a MF. Yes, maybe they have a massive fund, but I don't really consider fund size as what qualified you to be in that top tier class. Most of their investments have been piggy backing off of real PE firms and the few they've done on their own are not anything special. There's a long list of PE shops I'd go to before GSCP, probably many you've never even heard of.

Array
 
Sep 7, 2013 - 9:12pm

Marcus_Halberstram:

TPG is a shadow of its former self. Even among the elite, they cant all be winners... and TPG certainly isn't.

Bain is in a similar situation but didn't reach nearly the heights of TPG.

And the fact that you even mentioned GSCP makes me thing you're in some way linked to them and are trying to toot your own horn by mentioning them... which I know isn't the case. But imagine your skepticism if someone asks you to compare and contrast Oxford, Harvard and Chaplain University.

In all seriousness, GSCP isn't and never was a MF. Yes, maybe they have a massive fund, but I don't really consider fund size as what qualified you to be in that top tier class. Most of their investments have been piggy backing off of real PE firms and the few they've done on their own are not anything special. There's a long list of PE shops I'd go to before GSCP, probably many you've never even heard of.

Interesting, I always thought that most people would take TPG/Bain, maybe not GS over Apollo or Warburg, and probably split 50/50 vs. KKR/BX but could be wrong then. Would you take most good MMs like Court Square or Lindsay Goldberg over GSCP as well?

 
Sep 9, 2013 - 10:09am

I would absolutely take LG over GSCP (yes, PIA, although there is some hair splitting going on, GSCP = more than their primary PE investment business). I honestly don't know Court Square that well other than the name.

I could list out all the guys... but it would be a long list. Not to knock GS, but its just not at the same level (IMO) as the megafunds and its not the same type of investment experience you'll get vs. a lot of the other PE funds out there.

Also what is your view of the TPG/Bain over Apollo/Warburg based on? What you've read on WSO / heard people speculating about?

As much as people go on and on and on about which funds are better/top choice over others, the real decision making process is much more practical with the following factors:

1. Do you actually have an offer from more than one firm? Thats the biggest deciding factor, obviously (but not so obvious on WSO where you work at GS TMT and presumably have offers from Apollo, KKR, WP, BX, TPG, Bain, et al).

2. Do you think you may intend to stay in PE? Is this a firm you'd want to be at longer-term? (people, investment style, industry focus, track record, role of junior people, ability to move up, distribution across levels). What are the people like? The personalities are vastly different from Apollo vs. KKR vs. Carlyle. They are even different from one group to the next.

3. Associate experience. Every one of these firms wines and dines you and tells you how as an associate you're given so much responsibility and during investment committee often times Henry/Bob/Tony etc. will ask the junior most deal person what their concerns are and blah blah blah. But the experience is not the same from one firm to the next and I couldn't tell you details of the differences because I haven't sample half of dozen associate programs, but the differences are real and you get a sense of them from working with them while in banking, talking to people who work there and interviewing.

3. Do you know for sure you're going to to go to b-school? How do they place? Do they definitely push you out the door after 2 years, do they bring alot of people back after bschool? Do they pay for bschool?

4. Location: Bain+THL are in Boston, TPG+KKR+Apollo+HF et al have certain groups out west. Carlyle in DC, tech their tech is in Charlotte of all places. Where did you grow up, where do you have friends/know people. You work brutal hours, it REALLY REALLY sucks when you work those hours and they few cracks of daylight you see you don't know anyone/have any real friends.

The real reason people on WSO always want to know would you pick KKR over Apollo or Warburg over Carlyle or Bain over THL is not because they feel they may have to come to this decision and its not even for window shopping purposes. My view is its largely because they are generally mindless chimps that want to hear an overwhelming I'd rather go to A over B and C and D, so that they can work their asses off, beg, borrow, steal and murder to get to A and have everyone know/tell everyone they got an offer from A. Sadly they place more importance in that part of the equation (we all do to varying degree) than many of the more important ones above.

Array
  • 5
 
Sep 6, 2013 - 11:42pm

To add some color to one of the points above, you really shouldn't worry about securing MF interviews. If you're actually at GS TMT, GS FIG, or MS M&A, with strong grades from an Ivy, there is absolutely no way that you won't line up interviews with several megafunds for an associate role.

I summered at a top group, and ~50% of the class goes to a megafund. If you take out the state school kids, pretty much everyone goes to a megafund. (Obviously some of the state school kids get megafund jobs as well, but it's quite clear from historical recruiting trends that the kids from stronger schools tend to do better in recruiting.)

 
Sep 7, 2013 - 12:46am

Isn't there some risk nowadays with GS / MS banning analysts from interviewing while still on the job? You'd have to take that into consideration.

I see what others are saying, but let me play devil's advocate here really quickly:

Exit Opps:
Banking: Your banking opps won't be limited either way.
PE: You could wait two years to go into PE...or you could go straight into PE
Others (Corp Dev/Strat, BD): GS/MS is not necessarily more well-known than KKR. I work in F50 and every single recruiter here knows KKR and how legit it is.
MBA: I think this is the kicker. IF you're considering MBA at all down the road, you should take KKR. I'm sure you're already near one of the top buckets for potential MBA candidates but KKR makes you more "golden" than GS/MS just because of the lesser #s of megafund kids.

 
Sep 7, 2013 - 1:30am

My goal is to be in the NBA. Lakers wanna draft me in the first round as a lotto pick but I think I'll ride out Duke for two years instead because of the off change the Lakers won't extend my contract or another NBA team won't pick me up and I'll have to settle for the D League.

What a crazy world we live in when a KKR Analyst gig is considered (even on relative terms) risky.

While the debate is thoughtful and people have written good posts, the fact that this is even being debated says wonders to the fear mongering that banking generates amongst us.

KKR hands down without blinking.

 
Sep 7, 2013 - 3:38am

ke18sb:

My goal is to be in the NBA. Lakers wanna draft me in the first round as a lotto pick but I think I'll ride out Duke for two years instead because of the off change the Lakers won't extend my contract or another NBA team won't pick me up and I'll have to settle for the D League.

What a crazy world we live in when a KKR Analyst gig is considered (even on relative terms) risky.

While the debate is thoughtful and people have written good posts, the fact that this is even being debated says wonders to the fear mongering that banking generates amongst us.

KKR hands down without blinking.

http://ayainsight.co/ Curating the best advice and making it actionable.

 
Sep 7, 2013 - 3:48pm

ke18sb:

My goal is to be in the NBA. Lakers wanna draft me in the first round as a lotto pick but I think I'll ride out Duke for two years instead because of the off change the Lakers won't extend my contract or another NBA team won't pick me up and I'll have to settle for the D League.

What a crazy world we live in when a KKR Analyst gig is considered (even on relative terms) risky.

While the debate is thoughtful and people have written good posts, the fact that this is even being debated says wonders to the fear mongering that banking generates amongst us.

KKR hands down without blinking.

1st round pick drafted out of high school -> two years in NBA -> can't stick it and get cut -> D-League / some lower league in Europe -> retire at 30 because you find out you can't feed your family on a 40k salary -> no college degree and no tangible work skills and you have to work low paying jobs the rest of your life

Not pertaining to this scenario, but still...sometimes going the route where you are building your fundamentals is not a bad idea.

Still, I agree with you that KKR > GS/MS out of undergrad

 
Sep 7, 2013 - 3:02am

Thank you ke18sb! Couldn't have said it better. '...But Duke places so well in the NBA!!.... Plus, if I don't make it in the league at least I'll have a college degree...' Ha.

KKR for 2 years (extend for a 3rd) --> H/S MBA --> Sr. Assoc./VP PE.

Come on. Why has there been virtually no mention of the MBA route. This short cut is very doable. It's what I would do.

It's like people assume that everyone's cookie must be cut in the same shape of 2+2.

 
Sep 7, 2013 - 3:13am

Turn down both offers and do Teach for America.

I think you need to consider your audience on this website. How many folks work at KKR or a comparable PE firm? Probably close to zero. They aren't on this forum because they made it. Instead you're getting the advice of a bunch of banking monkeys, wannabes (like myself), or college kids who think banking is the gateway to their dreams. They can't possibly compute how great a deal you have, so they try to justify it by advising you to go banking because you'll get some great hand holding / menial bitch skills. Don't fall for it.

Just think about the fact that KKR is willing work with you to expedite their hiring decision to accommodate your offer at another bank. Do you think the opposite would be true for a college kid if the tables were turned?

 
Sep 7, 2013 - 4:43pm

This is closer than people may think, if you are 100pc set on mf pe then go with kit, detours are silly but bear the following in mind:

a) you have never actually done PE, you have no idea if you will like it. Whilst now you may think you kow exactly what you want your perspective may change over time, working 120 hours a week or two years really cahnges perspective. KKR pigeonholes you slighly more than banking does. Banking has more optionality and that optionality has inherent value, I am not sure KKR has sufficient upside to justify forgoing optionality.
b) social experience is huge and often underrated, you will build a very strong network in banking and make friends for life, this is unlikely to be the case at KKR. Banking will be more fun from the social side, this is the only thing I miss about banking.

 
Sep 13, 2013 - 1:11am

Many thanks for all the excellent insights and responses. I have been a lurker at WSO for a couple of years now, and this is easily one of the best discussions I have seen.

I cannot disclose which path I ended going down due to confidentiality reasons. I am happy to respond in private to some of the certified posters who took the time to write such incredibly helpful posts. Can share some views on the KKR analyst program as well if curious.

 
Sep 13, 2013 - 10:43am

Just to clarify a few things.

BX is still very much in the private equity business. The fact that the rest of their businesses have grown so large is not of any consequence. They have raised the largest PE fund post-crisis and with a $17bn fund and ~$3bn energy only PE fund, I think its safe to assume they may still have a small private equity investing business... maybe just 2 or 3 guys working from home or something.

Second, the Associate program at Apollo is NOT an offer for a 8-9 year partner track commitment. Culturally, they don't favor the 2+2+2 route as much as the rest of the guys. They also prefer not to take a guy that has done really well and make him a free agent again and have to compete for him all over again. Makes sense if you ask me, and its a bit surprising some of the others hold such a strong line on this point. My assumption has always been that its because you're not really viewed as "part of the gang" until you're post the Associate program. Until then you're there for 2 years but there's kind of an unspoken mentality of the Associates that are here temporarily and then there's "our people"... at most of these firms. Not that it makes much of a difference.

Third, how does Carlyle's multi-fund structure have anything to do with the reputation of the firm? That makes absolutely no sense. Fact is, they still have a main buyout fund (north of $10bn) and a bunch of ancillary funds... the only impact/purpose of which is for LP purposes so they can offer LPs very specific investment exposure. And this happens to be something they've done quite well and differentiated themselves in the LP world.

Fourth, WP dipping into too many things is also a completely non-sensical point. Again, this is a positive point of differentiation, not a negative. And the fact is that KKR also does early-phase investments, although not quite as much. KKR also does special situations, mezz and capital markets. The point made on the analyst title is completely ridiculous and just reiterates the fact that some people are less concerned with legitimate professional considerations and more concerned with peers knowing they are still referred to as an Analyst. And getting crushed workload-wise is probably about the ONLY way you can't distinguish any of these firms.

People go to KKR for the prestige and Apollo for the money. Its as simple as that. Any analysis beyond that is really just rationalizing (as the above posted did, and quite poorly) to get you to a your initial point of view.

There will always be people who assess career options based on how desirable it is to other people. And while the fact that 24 year olds with multiple options always pick option B is interesting, it doesn't make option B a clear and obvious choice, nor does it make it the pre-eminent PE shop unless you're a headhunter prioritizing clients or are a 24 year old basing your decision on a heard mentality and insecurity which is fairly rampant among prestige mongers.

Like I said, most people are attracted to KKR for the prestige and Apollo for the money. In terms of pedigree, if you put all of these professionals in a giant ballroom and walked around and heard each of their backgrounds, you wouldn't be able to distinguish which firm they work at. Like I said above, its a decision that comes down to a lot of different factors. Some people make the decision for strictly social reasons, others for personal/professional reasons... but most aren't even given this decision to make at all. And that doesn't preclude them from debating the issue ad nauseum (myself included).

I just wanted to clarify a few points made above. I think this discussion has quickly denigrated into a typical WSO prestige rank/wank-fest and I'll leave it be from here on out.

Array
  • 6
 
Sep 28, 2013 - 4:12pm

Marcus_Halberstram:

I just wanted to clarify a few points made above. I think this discussion has quickly denigrated into a typical WSO prestige rank/wank-fest and I'll leave it be from here on out.

Great post, thanks!

I'm talking about liquid. Rich enough to have your own jet. Rich enough not to waste time. Fifty, a hundred million dollars, buddy. A player. Or nothing.

See my Blog & AMA

 
Sep 13, 2013 - 3:12pm

Couldn't help but respond here. So i went to a top 2 MBA. It is safe to say that KKR (or any megafund) will facilitate your entry into a top MBA. More so than any bank. Admissions counselors know how competitive it is to get into those places... Almost every finance guy in my class had PE/HF. IB only meant candidate had some great personal stories. Its not a guaranteed in, but close enough.

Your exit opps will most definitely be better. After 2 years you could go to a hedge fund or pretty much any other non-quant financial role. Of course the MBA is always there.

Keep this in mind. Buy-side experience is very hard to come by and is therefore highly valued. The sooner you can get it the better. The only way there should even be a debate is if the PE firm in question is relatively small and is unlikely to provide adequate training.

 
Sep 15, 2013 - 8:13pm

No guaranteed promotion to being an associate after your 2 years at KKR, but lets think about it. Would KKR really have a program just to kick people out? If anything, it's probably cheaper for KKR to recruit kids out of UG that they can train themselves to EVENTUALLY be associates, Instead of going through another shit show recruiting kids across the street.

If you're good enough to land a FT offer with a top BB group, then I would imagine you're smart enough to figure things out @ the job at KKR. Yeah it will be another level of difficulty (less margin for error, etc.), but if you are even asking about this when you clearly want to end up in PE or MF, maybe you arent as confident about yourself.

let us know what happens though since this really is an interesting thread with no clear cut answer.

 
Mar 3, 2014 - 3:38pm

Followed this thread on and off so not sure if this actual link was provided already. Provides one datapoint on the varied experience as a straight-out-of-undergrad Analyst at a megafund:

http://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Silver-Lake-Partners-Reviews-E11382.htm

"Pros – Compensation is pretty incredible. However, exit opportunities are questionable. You learn a very narrow skill set at the analyst level and the experience can be highly varied. You could be doing due diligence or you could spend your entire year making power point presentations for a partner who wants to present on the economic crisis.

Cons – Make sure this is the firm you want to stay with forever, because at the analyst level, there are few exits. Your experience is highly variable and may not qualify you for the jobs you want. Plus there is tremendous pressure to stay 4-5 years.

Advice to Senior Management – Give analysts more responsibility. The analysts are highly competant and don't need to take baby steps. Senior members should give us more respect"

 
Mar 3, 2014 - 7:35pm

As an aside, I haven't met too many people that worked at SilverLake that had particularly positive things to say about it. I don't have specific examples, so take that with a grain of salt, but consensus was that culture/people is/are not easy to work in/with.

Array
  • 1
 
Mar 3, 2014 - 9:51pm

Marcus_Halberstram:

As an aside, I haven't met too many people that worked at SilverLake that had particularly positive things to say about it. I don't have specific examples, so take that with a grain of salt, but consensus was that culture/people is/are not easy to work in/with.

That's an interesting note, given most probably came from banking where culture can also vary from being good to unspeakably horrible. So I wonder if your friends/acquaintances from SL had a high or low benchmark to base/rate their SL experience.

Start Discussion

Popular Content See all

Student-run private equity funds?
+36IBby Prospective Monkey in Investment Banking - Mergers and Acquisitions">Prospect in IB-M&A
I wish I was an airline pilot
+21OFFby Vice President in Investment Banking - Mergers and Acquisitions">VP in IB-M&A
BMO fired all of its Houston Bankers (~60 people)
+20IBby Intern in Investment Banking - Mergers and Acquisitions">Intern in IB-M&A
Zoom events are cringe as hell
+17OFFby Prospective Monkey in Investment Banking - Mergers and Acquisitions">Prospect in IB-M&A
Do I quit IB for YouTube
+15IBby 3rd+ Year Analyst in Investment Banking - Industry/Coverage">Analyst 3+ in IB - Ind

Total Avg Compensation

December 2020 Private Equity

  • Principal (6) $693
  • Director/MD (14) $640
  • Vice President (56) $360
  • 3rd+ Year Associate (60) $272
  • 2nd Year Associate (112) $246
  • 1st Year Associate (246) $224
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (23) $162
  • 2nd Year Analyst (54) $140
  • 1st Year Analyst (158) $119
  • Intern/Summer Associate (17) $66
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (172) $60

Leaderboard See all

1
LonLonMilk's picture
LonLonMilk
98.4
2
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
98.3
3
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
98.3
4
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
97.9
5
redever's picture
redever
97.8
6
Addinator's picture
Addinator
97.6
7
bolo up's picture
bolo up
97.5
8
frgna's picture
frgna
97.5
9
NuckFuts's picture
NuckFuts
97.5
10
Edifice's picture
Edifice
97.5