Small fund turning into extremely toxic environment

Does anyone have any experience dealing with small funds that have turned into extreme toxic work environments? My current work place is one. If you read some of my older posts, you will know that I have been trying to leave my current employer, which is a small PM-run fund with only 2 analysts under the PM. The workplace has gotten particularly toxic, which is also due to the PM trying purposely to pit the two analysts against each other. There is constant work sabotage. For example, if I am covering stock / sector A, the other analyst will secretly dig some dirt or information on this industry and send to the boss without letting me know. Knowing this, I will have no choice but to go out of my way digging dirt on his stocks / coverage sector and throwing crap back at him. The fund has devolved into this type of dynamic for the past 9-11 months, and currently, nobody talks to one another at the firm. I am currently looking for other job opportunities but I would also like some advice on how to deal with this toxicity. The firm has become so toxic that I believe I spend about 50-75% of my time at office trying to look at what the other person is doing in order to defend myself from this attacks. He also seems to spend a significant amount of time looking at my sector / coverage rather than focusing on his work.

How would you deal with something like this? I actually almost have an offer now, should I just resign the day that I sign the contract?

Thanks

Comments (9)

Aug 6, 2019

Maybe they aren't attacks but discussion?

The whole point is to get your thesis attacked again and again so it's bullet proof.

Part of the job is to be able to take constructive criticism very well, more so than other occupations I would say.

If you feel it's truly malicious, talk to the PM about it. On the other than you have a contract waiting for you, but make sure to spend the time to look in the mirror. Double-check if it's only you who maybe be imagining or thinking this and not to take these bad imprints to your next fund.

    • 1
Aug 6, 2019

this is completely not correct. if you want to challenge someone's view or ideas, you involve that same person in the discussion. in this case, the guy seems to be talking directly to the PM about stocks he doesn't cover and leaving the responsible analyst out of the communication.. seems toxic and nonsense

    • 1
Aug 6, 2019

Did iIjust shit thrown at me online lolz. Nice.

"seems to be". If it's proven, then put it out on the table and talk to these guys.

I agree it is toxic, but what's the take away here? He/she is leaving already. These experiences still cause negative/bad imprints that could be carried over to the next fund. The question is to assess the residual damange and it's not bought over.

    • 1
Aug 6, 2019

Me personally - I wouldn't take that shit and I would be looking for a new gig asap. Work is not supposed to 95% drama unless you're an actor.

    • 1
Aug 10, 2019

I don't think there is a way of resolving it short of leaving. How's the PM's performance with such a terrible process?

Aug 11, 2019

We are currently underperforming the average HF index significantly. The fund also has not made money since inception. A big part of the problem is too much energy is wasted infighting and clashing of big (unjustified) egos at the expense of shareholder/LP capital. The PM does not allow the two analysts to generate any ideas and trading is based on TA rather than fundamentals (there is almost no fundamental analysis despite the fund advertising itself to LP as a "fundamental", mid-long-term based fund)

Aug 11, 2019

esh sounds like no reason to stay

Aug 11, 2019

This sounds like a reason to leave regardless of how nice or mean the other people on the team are. I don't understand how the firm still has sufficient AUM...

Funniest
Aug 11, 2019
Comment
    • 2