As an analyst, would you rather work 60 hrs a week for $90k or 90 hours a week for $135k?

dumb question. answer is obviously 60 hours when given no other context, unless you are a masochist. but what job is going to pay you 90k for 60 hours right out of college? those jobs are few and far between.

you go work 90 hours at IBank because 1) 90K/60hr jobs are rare out of undergrad and 2) after you do IBank for 2 years you can go to top PE and your pay doubles for comparable/lower hours

If you do an MFE right after college, you can easily find a job that pays 90K while working under 60 hours a week, and it's just one extra year of school.

I laugh at the 50 voters who selected 90 hours / $135k total compensation. That extra $45k really worth the incremental 30 hours a week? Really? Think about it...

Aside from the monetary component, most of the value associated with an analyst stint in IBD is embedded in the springboard it provides towards other opportunities. Factoring in that fixed component, and all else equal, it is obviously more worth it to work 60 hours a week for 90k.

I had a job that paid 90K and was 60 hours a week. Right out of undergrad. In a city a LOT cheaper than NYC. PE, not IBD.

It pays to consider options other than "oh I have to go be an IBD slave because that is the best springboard for other opportunities". Some of the people on here are so short sighted that it boggles my mind. Many of you are bright yet oblivious to how the system is tooling you over, it's hilarious. I resigned from that PE job, and since then I have made just as much trading in 6 months than I did in a whole year in PE (and a lot less stressful and fewer hours, btw). Not just that, but I have a lot more flexibility with regard to my career path than I would have had I not resigned (and definitely a lot more than if I had gone and been another mindless IBD analyst monkey).