Which to take: A tier-2/3 investment bank equity research v.s. a 50m usd aum long-short HF (both in HK)?

Hi friend first time to raise question here, Forgive me if I am not following any convention right. I am a incoming fresh graduate from a top school in HK with major in finance and politics . A real growth and value investing lover. Now two offers in hand as mention above. Want to get some seasoned advice and comments on long term career prospects for each. The HF is a tiger grand cub, with growth stock focus, team headcount only 6-7, growing fast. The ibank is one of the major japanese ones with good reputation in ER. Thanks!

Hedge Fund Interview Course

  • 814 questions across 165 hedge funds. Crowdsourced from over 500,000 members.
  • 11 Detailed Sample Pitches and 10+ hours of video.
  • Trusted by over 1,000 aspiring hedge fund professionals just like you.

Comments (6)

May 13, 2017

Would go hedge fund. If it was a bulge bracket bank would take that instead given that the fund is small and thus high risk. However, given that its a tier 2/3 bank, the fund seems to have some pedigree/momentum, and it sounds like you prefer investing I'd go HF

May 13, 2017

Any more info on the HF eg when it was launched/performance since? Headcount seems high for aum so it looks like aum is expected to ramp up soon.

May 13, 2017

Take the HF role, but do some strong due diligence on the founders and therefore assess likelihood of not going bust.

Both roles are good though.

May 13, 2017

none of those sound too good, but at least HF has prospects -- so take that

May 13, 2017

Take Nomura. With all due respect, 50M AUM probably means a no-name shop. If it goes bust, your career is screwed.

May 18, 2017