Better Group or Better bank?
Would you rather be in your first choice group in a second choice bank (E.g. M&A Execution in UBS)
or
Second choice group in first choice bank? ((E.g. ABS origination in GS)
Lets limit to Top 10 BB's in terms of banks, and in IBD functions.
Are exit opps more dependant on the bank you work for or the group you work for?
(I'm not too sure if the above-mentioned groups do exist/named in those banks. But the discussion is to weigh between bank and group choice, NOT what groups/banks are your first choice.)
Groups -- go where you'd get the best deal flow as an analyst all other things being equal.
I would take MS M&A / UBS LA / CS LA / CS Sponsors / Lazard / GHL over most GS groups.
Also, make sure the group aligns with what you want. For example, if you are interested in placement talk to people in the group to see where analysts have placed before. If you want promotion to third year do the same type of investigation.
This is in my opinion and I think the best way to make sure you get what you want out of your analyst stint.
ABS origination is SO FAR from M&A in terms of skillset, exit opps, and lifestyle, no matter what bank either group is at. That is a ridiculous question to ask; those are two totally different careers.
Besides, if someone in the M&A group at UBS (which is on e of their top groups) really wanted to, he could lateral over to GS IBD for his 3rd year and have more or less the same exit opps as if he had started there.
Zala makes a really good point. I didn't bother really reading the post completely... ABS and M&A are very different.
The point about lateralling is dead on too.
Better group.
Cum cupiditate in nisi autem sint officia. Qui omnis atque facilis distinctio beatae.
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...