which EBs over GS/MS?
Are there any EBs you would take over GS/MS? PWP? Gugg? Or would you always take GS/MS despite the pay gap?
Mainly interested in analyst level but also curious about other levels
Trending Content
| +134 | Is my life over after not getting GS? | 32 | 3h | |
| +73 | Best IB group on the Street | 35 | 3h | |
| +66 | Thoughts and tips on how to speak like an investment banker. | 25 | 1d | |
| +58 | BIG FOUR ARE PARADISE | 15 | 22h | |
| +49 | Tell me one good reason why Jefferies isn’t going to be a top bank in the next 5 years | 23 | 14h | |
| +38 | UBS Outlook | 28 | 2d | |
| +35 | How to deal with egotistical team? | 6 | 3d | |
| +32 | Are you “less ambitious” for having long term goals outside of NYC | 13 | 6h | |
| +26 | Very ridiculous interview feedback | 13 | 8h | |
| +26 | Got RBC offer but I have cold feet accepting. | 34 | 10h |
Career Resources
EVR LAZ CVP Moelis PJT
(edit: added PJT)
Agree, moelis has been killing it
Would add PJT to this group for sure
just did! Completely forgot about them, I would take that too. Probably not Greenhill.
What happened to GHL
Most people don't add them to the list of EBs anymore
I would add PWP too (Ik a lot of ppl that chose PWP over MOE/LAZ)
Second this
This is 100% right. Look at 1st half league tables this year, PWP had higher deal value than MOCO and PJT combined. CVP,EVR,PWP,LAZ,MOE,PJT are all comparable
EVR/PJT/CVP
What about Laz/Moe?
All great, I think those would be based more on whether you really want the smaller feel or prefer the industry group. However from conversations with top target students there tends to be a more unqualified preference for the three I mentioned (certainly some variance esp if you liked the team though).
moelis / cvp pay associates 400k
GS pays their associates 260k
not a hard q
What about for analysts?
lol, maybe moelis AS3 vs GS AS1
Moelis pays that much? Jesus christ.
Moelis ASO comp may touch it in your last associate year, but not in your first two. CVP is a different story — absurd comp
EVR/PJT/MOE/LAZ/CVP/PWP imo
Agreed. How does Greenhill and Guggenheim stack up then compared to BBs?
Greenhill is really a "how the mighty have fallen" story in some ways. Lots of senior exits and loss of profile in the market over the last few years. Still a fine firm but definitely doesn't carry the stature it once did.
Guggenheim is not even close to the same league as EVR/PJT
Edit: MS from salty gugg losers. Hope you had fun at your nontarget
This is a completely different question depending on whether you're looking at it from the viewpoint of an analyst or associate. At my MBA program, many pursue EVR/PJT/CVP/MOE/GUGG/PWP over MS/GS (Qatalyst and Allen & Co didn't recruit). The pay gap between those firms is just too large, especially at the associate 2/3 level. Prestige, brand name recognition, and rankings on WSO become much less important when you're coming in as a smooth-brained MBA associate. Those firms I listed are paying lights out at the associate level based on everyone that I've talked to.
What about at the analyst level?
Same story. Only take GS/MS if you want to leave finance after 2 years
Gugg over MS/GS seems like a stretch. Kids from my target don't take Gugg over Bofa/Barc.
Are you referring to incoming analysts at your school? If so, I get that. I'm only referring to associates. The people heading to Gugg from my school had offers at other EBs listed in my comment.
Exactly, ppl are respecting GUGG way way too much recently. It’s a fine firm, but not over those top BB’s
I'm at bofa/barc and I fuckin regret not taking my gugg offer lmao, prolly not over gs/ms but certainly over mid-bbs with the pay raise
Surprised nobody has mentioned Qatalyst yet. Wouldn't you take that over GS/MS?
Goldman TMT analysts have hopped to Qatalyst before so yes
What about Raine/LionTree?
Bump for undergrad
Would not consider vs. GS/MS, case to be made vs. other BBs if you really like the media focus/environment.
Can't say much about Raine as I don't know them though their hybrid merchant banking / investment banking model is pretty cool (believe LionTree does something similar though I think they are more siloed there but correct me if I'm wrong please) but LionTree is certainly an amazing option to consider. Not sure if they hire MBAs but if you're interested in Media deals then there's really no better place to be. They kill it in that space and have one of the best bankers in Media - Aryeh Bourkoff - who I can only imagine would be amazing to learn from. But I'm sure it's a sweatshop given the lean team structure and roll they generally take on on deals (either lead financial advisor or directly to the right of the lead). Not sure what their comp is compared to the bulges though..
Super group dependent -- PJT RSSG, Evercore M&A, GS TMT/FIG, MS M&A are all going to be preferred over the rest of the GS and MS coverage groups which are interchangeable with the rest of the EBs, which would be preferred over the DCM and ECM groups at GS/MS. Priorities change depending on the individual too -- some people would never want a three year analyst program, but for someone open to being a career banker, CVP should be their top choice. If you're die hard tech, then Qatalyst would be a top offer. Some people at my target straight up won't apply to Moelis and/or Lazard for culture reasons. This list goes on.
EVR/LAZ/BMO/Mizuho/PJT
Shit list. Kids at my top target (Wharton for the dumbfucks out there) all tell me they consistently take Financial Technology Partners over top BBs. Found the non-target, everyone!
Can’t tell if this is a joke or not lol
Lumping the entire GS & MS probably isn't the right way to look at it. Overall, I'd always take any groups at Evercore or PJT over any groups at GS or MS.
CVP would be the third top choice EB, with Lazard and Moelis as potential options over non GS TMT or MS M&A groups. In general, a no-brainer to take Evercore/PJT over GS/MS, and start comparing groups if it's CVP, Lazard, or Moelis. I wouldn't consider Gugg or PWP over GS/MS though. This should be the relevant all the way from Analyst to VP level.
If you're chill with the three year program, CVP hands down. Top tier pay (make more than most buy-side associates in your second analyst year), work only on high-impact transactions, and get a high level of responsibility and client interaction. Other EBs as mentioned would be Evercore and PJT.
EVR, PJT, CVP
Tobin & Co / BGL / HSBC are the only EBs I would take over GS/MS
this
I'd take them all (EVR, CVP, PJT, Moelis, Lazard, PWP). GS TMT will have better exits than the average EB, but the average EB analyst will have similar exits to the average GS analyst. I'd rather be in a smaller group, with less bureaucracy, and much more pay than GS, especially in light of everything that's happened
Tobin & Co.
This might be an unpopular opinion, but here's my two cents for those who are fortunate enough to be weighing offers from GS / MS and an EB.
At the end of the day, the answer to the question of which offer to take depends on the individual. But in general, I would advise taking MS / GS over an EB because of several reasons:
1. Non-PE Exit Opportunities: There are very few ppl who know exactly what career they want to pursue at the age of 22. I've met ppl who claim they want to stay in IB or finance forever and leave after 2 years, and I have met ppl who never wanted to go into finance in the first place rise to become a VP / MD. Your career preferences and priorities will change as you progress through life, and as a result, GS / MS will give you an edge no matter what industry you choose to go into
2. Network: While it is true that EBs provide a more tight knit circle amongst the juniors, one cannot deny that MS / GS provides the broadest network due to the sheer size of the companies. The quality of the connections themselves is up for debate, but having alumni who work in top government positions (Steve Mnuchin, Tomas Nides) or go on to create leading financial institutions themselves (Frank Quattrone, Orlando Bravo) is invaluable in itself if you ever need to tap into the network in the future. This is one of the reasons why McKinsey is so powerful, because their alumni are literally everywhere in top positions across the world
3. Exposure: If you want to become an effective investment banker, in addition to being able to execute M&A processes effectively, gaining exposure and being knowledgeable in equity and debt products is also important. You will need to help clients run dual-track processes, and be able to understand the different types of instruments that can be used to finance a deal. Working at a company such as GS / MS will give you that experience
4. Key Man Risk: The history of EBs are still relatively new, with the exception of Lazard, most of them have been around for 20-25 years. When the founder retires, there is going to be a risk that the firm's performance will begin to deteriorate as a result. Now, as I said, that is only a risk, it's not certain what is going to happen when Ken Moelis or Paul Taubman stop running their companies, and they may well have great successors to continue on their legacy. But for prospective students who are entering the industry, this is a point worth considering. What happened to Greenhill after the founder handed over operations to a new CEO is a great example
Now, the benefits of working at an EB are well illustrated in this forum, so as I said, the question of which offer to take is highly dependent on the individual. The points above mainly serve to provide a different perspective to the ones already shared.
Lastly, if you are considering taking GS / MS over an EB, make sure it's for the right reasons, and not smth like prestige or the quality of PE exits, because those should not be the factors affecting your decision if you manage to secure these offers
Hopefully, this helps create a more balanced discussion, and any feedback or suggestions are welcome
Great answer, I think you nailed it.
Thoughts on doing AN/ASSOC years at an EB then lateraling to GS/MS for VP/D years then going to the best EB in 10 years? Lol
Pretty sure I want to do banking long-term and am going to Centerview but am worried about the firms post-Effron outlook
Lol this is a retarded outlook and absurdly optimistic
Great post, I would also add that this depends on location as well. In the US, you can argue that most, if not all EBs present an attractive alternative to GS / MS. Whereas in Europe, that would be a different consideration
In Europe, I know many people who lateral from MS/GS to Rothschild.
I would add that your comment is more for analysts. The comp difference post MBA might outweigh the other factors.
Broadly, I agree with the point you are trying to make and I think that the main point is really #1 and #4. I've heard from some people I know at some of the firms mentioned that if the key man weren't there, a decent amount of revenue would go away. Generally, smaller banks with larger clients have this issue as the junior dealmaker being mentored by the partner / MD at the boutique is really not in-line to inherit any clients. Below are some rebuttals for the other points:
2) The networks built at large firms used to be quite different than how they are now. Back in the 80s and early 90s at both of those firms, the analyst class sizes at those firms were under 20 people. Over time they grew. However, in the beginning, every analyst will ultimately meet all of the other analysts. Furthermore, there were fewer firms on Wall Street that regularly recruited junior employees. Many of the serious dealmakers at all of the banks cut their teeth at GS / MS back in the day. The network is useful now because those firms used to be smaller and more exclusive, now they hire a wide array of individuals and some of the top talent that would've gone into finance frankly do other things. Your network will be pretty good at a big bank but it won't be anything like the people that you mentioned because the set-up was just different when they started their careers.
3) The boutique banks do more than M&A. The set-up is actually quite similar to a large bank's set-up. They have capital advisory groups for ECM and DCM, workout groups, etc. As an analyst on a deal, you see how the sausage gets made on each side, what you don't see is how shares or debt is actually distributed (which could be argued is largely useless), but you run the same analyses, check the allocations, and (sometimes) you help pick which banks get on a deal and learn how to spread the candy.
.
jokes are supposed to be funny
As an analyst, it doesn't matter which one you pick. You will be in a great position regardless
If you are an associate or a VP and above, go with the EB. Better pay, career progression and mentorship
Removed from recruiting for a bit now and not a BB or an EB, but if I had the offers in front of me, I would 100% take EVR, CVP, and PJT, with MoCo and LAZ being fringe but can flip yes depending on if I liked the team I spoke to. If I didn't like the team, would probably go with MS since those two can have bad hours and an unfriendly team can really kill the deal there. Great firms, just very tough lifestyle. Would take all six aforementioned banks over GS--the culture and leadership there seems so bad that as someone who wants to stay in banking, it just isn't worth it to me. And if I were trying to exit to PE, I can't imagine GS is that much better than EVR/PJT/MS. Network and broadness of exit opps from GS/MS def better tho.
How are moelis and Lazard fringe? To say the least, moelis is doing great and has amazing exits
Fringe because from what I know from people at all of the EB banks i mentioned, those two generally have tougher cultures than EVR/CVP/PJT--MoCo all around and Lazard a bit more group dependent. PJT can also be bad too tho from what I heard. Nothing to do with the deal flow/exits. MoCo and LAZ are fantastic.
Et recusandae maiores sapiente corporis id. Accusantium inventore sapiente mollitia aperiam. A incidunt ipsa et aut provident. Consequatur vitae officia officia fugit. Doloremque porro magni in eos. Nesciunt dolorem dicta in tempore eveniet ea quaerat.
Qui aut dolorem est officiis. Sit nihil ut voluptatum commodi occaecati porro soluta. Dicta quod ut nostrum. Ea qui consectetur ex aut saepe voluptatem.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Maiores quia animi consequatur ut doloremque dolores quo. Ut deserunt culpa ex.
Repudiandae nulla est omnis minus. Assumenda incidunt quidem vitae porro est similique at placeat. Ullam aut explicabo dolorem et dignissimos id aspernatur. Rerum est asperiores dicta et voluptatem error velit.
Vitae adipisci nostrum neque exercitationem laborum impedit veniam. Adipisci excepturi ullam dolores repellat necessitatibus.
Odio iusto reprehenderit velit optio corporis. Maxime expedita sequi est tempore est aut aut eligendi. Nisi tempore rem vel amet maxime ipsa. Pariatur quia autem omnis sint quam magni ea.
Cum et ut harum. Et culpa deleniti nulla et et velit excepturi. Aperiam quaerat facilis porro quas sit ea sit.
Dolores aut illo earum accusantium provident ut quo. Fugiat recusandae nulla officiis harum illum fuga consequatur ut. Qui aperiam nisi molestiae. Cum et vel mollitia et. At facilis repellat vero est ipsum qui. Quaerat laborum repellat ullam hic non soluta repellat.
Earum et et qui voluptas est quod repellat eos. Similique consequatur voluptas omnis quam.
Harum et explicabo provident sunt illo. Recusandae necessitatibus rerum reprehenderit voluptatem. Et qui iusto ipsam est modi. Voluptatem excepturi numquam autem dignissimos mollitia ullam esse.
Tempore cupiditate itaque et voluptatem est officiis veniam repudiandae. Consequatur quia et illum quia omnis nihil ex.
Soluta et ipsam sit repellendus magni. Laudantium blanditiis consequuntur consequatur est. Aperiam reprehenderit cupiditate laborum aliquid. Quam sequi vero minus earum culpa enim quod. Itaque doloremque labore provident eveniet ut consequatur autem. Unde quidem quam impedit nemo repudiandae minima ut.