I'm currently a middle market credit analyst for a larger regional bank. Internally, I'm on the career path to become a lender.
Last week I was approached by a recruiter from a private equity company. I have always wanted to move to private equity, but I thought it would take a couple more years to develop the skills I'd need to make the move.
Anyway, they have a couple of associate jobs open that they'd like me to apply for, risk associate (sounds like periodic reviews of portfolio companies) and leveraged finance associate (working on new transactions). Which of these two should I make the priority?
In commercial banking it seems that when they have roles dedicated to existing borrower risk review, those jobs are typically not where you want to go, but given the higher level of commitment to deals/lower number of transactions in PE I could see that not being the case there.
My bank actually has our credit analysts do both new deal underwriting and existing borrower reviews, and our middle market groups do a lot of deals with PE firms, so I feel like I could do either job.
Which job has the better career path? Is it even an issue in PE? I may be well served to take what I can get on the PE side and figure it out when I get there. I just don't want to leave my lender track job if it's like commerical banking where the dedicated review people are locked in a closet with no hope of ever working in a revenue generating role.
Private Equity Interview Course
- 2,447 questions across 203 private equity funds. Crowdsourced from over 500,000 mem.
- 9 Detailed LBO Modeling Tests and 15+ hours of video solutions.
- Trusted by over 1,000 aspiring private equity professionals just like you.