This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
The more significant equity research vs. investment banking differences relate to recruiting and careers , including points such as the compensation and exit opportunities. But you would not build models for M&A deals, leveraged buyouts, or debt/equity issuances in research or at least, they would be far simpler than the IB versions.
The basic difference is that the international bulgebracket banks tend to be stronger in M&A advisory and weaker in equity and debt capital markets. These banks focus on the capital markets, so you should target the bulgebrackets if you want to work on M&A deals. As in the U.S.,
based bulgebrackets (GS, MS, JPM, Citi, and BofA) are the strongest international banks, and Avendus, Kotak, JM Financial, ICICI, and Axis are the strongest domestic firms. Among the bulgebrackets, the U.S.-based based firms (GS, MS, Citi, JPM, and BofA) tend to perform best. Here’s why it’s a Herculean task.
Recruiting in Wealth Management vs. Investment Banking You should know all about IB recruiting from reading this site, but it’s insanely competitive and starts very early. So, you won’t pull all-nighters to finish pitch books , and you won’t be called in over the weekend to make last-minute changes to a model.
But then recruiting moved up, the MBA process became more structured, and now we have 4-year-olds aiming for “Target Kindergartens” so they can eventually get into investment banking ~15 years in the future. Instead, pick a single company and give yourself 1-2 hours to assess it and build a simple model.
The work might not be for you , even if you’re good at it – for example, maybe you find deals far more interesting than building a client book or managing their portfolios. The compensation ceiling is lower than in IB or WM, but it’s still quite high (mid-to-upper-six figures), and recruiting is much less competitive than IB.
For example, if a renewable developer wanted to raise debt to build a new offshore wind farm as a separate entity, it would fall under Project Finance. In the middle market , Jefferies has recruited some of the top bankers in renewable energy M&A and is expected to do well going forward.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 38,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content