Can you guys comment on two attributes of equity research? 1. What kind of hours should an equity research associate (mid-level role, someone with 3-4 years of experience switching from a different area of finance) expect? This relates to a position at one of the top banks… 2. Compensation? Thanks
I’m in the same boat and am interested in this thread… I think the pay for you and i (both with 3+ years, different areas of finance) would be around $80k base…normal hours during the year, hellish hours during earnings season
10-11 hrs/day normal 12-14 hrs/day + weekends during earnings & launches Also depends on sector (how much news), size of the firm (can you hire one more associate?), size of coverage, and analyst success (lots of clients? lots of follow-ups) Base is about what the above poster said for first year
(1) Whether you’re an “experienced” financial hire or not, your hours as an equity research will be pretty similar. It all depends on how quickly and flawlessly you can get your work done. I worked for three years at bulge-bracket banks doing equity research, and a standard day for non-earnings season went from 7:30AM to about 7:00PM with occasional work on the weekends. For days where earnings were reported or when I was attending an industry conference/major event, I’d be working till 11PM, and occasionally midnight or 1AM. My hours were slightly worse than many of my colleagues. (2) Compensation really varies. Nobody really cares that you worked in some other area of finance unless it were investment banking, corporate finance or some other front-office capital markets role. However, if you’re a few years out of school and don’t have your MBA, your base may be anywhere between $65-80K at a top bank. I don’t know what your bonus would be like because I have no idea what kind of performer you are or for whom you’d be working.
$80k base for a top bank in NYC???
wow, i’m shocked the numbers are so low for a equity analyst at top BB a few years out of school. i’m assuming bonuses are ~50%. I thought all FO BB jobs make 100k+
bonuses 50%-100% I think its hard to gauge after the year we just had
Those are base numbers, so of course with bonuses your total take-home is in the six figures as an experienced hire. I don’t know why you’d be surprised with an $80K base. So, hypothetically, you’ve worked in other areas of finance, but if it wasn’t in investment banking or front-office capital markets and you don’t have an MD or MBA, why would an employer have to pay you more? Also, there are droves of people that want to get into equity research. Even when times were good, I had advertised a position for a junior associate role on my team and within a week, we had 250 resume submissions. I can only imagine what things are like now.
I guess it all depends on experience. Mine definitely includes front-office roles at great places + Ivy League degree, so I would expect to get paid more than someone just switching into this field.
Well, you shouldn’t necessarily expect that, because anyone that successfully makes the transition has a pretty solid work background already. Nobody pays you more for having an “Ivy League” degree – they care about whether or not you can perform on the job. When/if you get an offer, they’ll pay you whatever they’d normally pay for someone they’d hire for that role…there isn’t an extra “premium” for you just because you went to a good school, worked elsewhere, etc.
I wouldn’t agree with the last point you made. There is a reason why firms constantly hire people for identical roles and pay them VERY different salaries.
You don’t have to agree with me, and it’s fine if you want to stick with whatever personal anecdotes strike your fancy. However, my insights are based on (1) working in equity research for several years at a “top” firm (maybe the one you are trying to work at, who knows?); (2) making hiring decisions; and (3) graduating from a top undergrad and getting admitted to a top 3 business school. Yet, I realize that none of this stuff really matters in my day-to-day; people seem to only care what I’ve done for them lately, and what I will do for them going forward. And I respect that. People that come from backgrounds like mine, yours, or others often have a certain mindset of possessing something “unique” and “differentiable” to offer – and this is a sentiment that is perhaps misplaced. The fact is, there are many people like you on Wall Street or are trying to get a job there; and that right now, your contributions will be more functional or tactical in nature than as a leader or a strategic. And that’s just the reality that most people faced when they’re where you are in your career track; it was the same for me too when I started working in finance. However, until you move from a tactical role to something that’s actually focused on idea generation and strategic work, you will get paid somewhere in whatever the band/range is for people of your seniority. I will repeat again that once you’re at the office, nobody cares where you went to school some half decade ago, and people will only care about what you do on the job. All I’m trying to say is that (1) get the offer first, then worry about compensation later; and (2) to say that because of what you’ve done in your 3-4 years or however long you’ve been out of school merits some type of special divergence from typical compensation would be unrealistic. We *all* want to get paid more – I want to get paid more every day because I think I am “above average” because of this, that, and so forth; but there is often a real difference between what you want versus what you get, and in time, you’ll probably realize that it’s to your benefit *not* to stand out in the workplace because you tote some diploma from a fancy school that’s really gathering dust on your wall at home (or in my case, in a drawer somewhere). You’re much better off standing out for different reasons, like being a top performer and having your colleagues speak well of what you do – and THIS is how people get paid.
numi Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You don’t have to agree with me, and it’s fine if > you want to stick with whatever personal anecdotes > strike your fancy. However, my insights are based > on (1) working in equity research for several > years at a “top” firm (maybe the one you are > trying to work at, who knows?); (2) making hiring > decisions; and (3) graduating from a top undergrad > and getting admitted to a top 3 business school. > > Yet, I realize that none of this stuff really > matters in my day-to-day; people seem to only care > what I’ve done for them lately, and what I will do > for them going forward. And I respect that. People > that come from backgrounds like mine, yours, or > others often have a certain mindset of possessing > something “unique” and “differentiable” to offer > – and this is a sentiment that is perhaps > misplaced. > > The fact is, there are many people like you on > Wall Street or are trying to get a job there; and > that right now, your contributions will be more > functional or tactical in nature than as a leader > or a strategic. And that’s just the reality that > most people faced when they’re where you are in > your career track; it was the same for me too when > I started working in finance. However, until you > move from a tactical role to something that’s > actually focused on idea generation and strategic > work, you will get paid somewhere in whatever the > band/range is for people of your seniority. I will > repeat again that once you’re at the office, > nobody cares where you went to school some half > decade ago, and people will only care about what > you do on the job. > > All I’m trying to say is that (1) get the offer > first, then worry about compensation later; and > (2) to say that because of what you’ve done in > your 3-4 years or however long you’ve been out of > school merits some type of special divergence from > typical compensation would be unrealistic. We > *all* want to get paid more – I want to get paid > more every day because I think I am “above > average” because of this, that, and so forth; but > there is often a real difference between what you > want versus what you get, and in time, you’ll > probably realize that it’s to your benefit *not* > to stand out in the workplace because you tote > some diploma from a fancy school that’s really > gathering dust on your wall at home (or in my > case, in a drawer somewhere). You’re much better > off standing out for different reasons, like being > a top performer and having your colleagues speak > well of what you do – and THIS is how people get > paid. Stop crushing people’s dreams Numi. It’s OK VegaVixen, you should get 100k base easy. Just reference where you went to undergrad 11-13 times in the interview and you’ll be straight (assuming the interview is with someone you connected with via your undergraduate studies, which is where the majority of the real value in the name of your school lies, in my opinion).
Are you brothers with that guy who’s going to be worth 150k in 1 years time?
$100k for a reasearch associate…thats ridiculous. my friend just got hired at CS with 0 ER experience but about a year at Lazard in IB at 90k…i think 80 is the realisitc target IMO. she didnt have any series licenses or even CFA L1.
Interesting, jcole21…I also heard a rumor that you can also increase the upper end of your bonus range if you successfully name-drop your elementary school during mid-year reviews
Yeah, I have yet to meet someone in ER who doesn’t have a top degree, so I wouldn’t use that as a source of differentiation. What was your front office experience? You’re being very vague about it so I’m guessing sales. Plus if it was IB or ER(the only ones that matter) you wouldn’t have to be asking us this dumb question. As they said, it’s a flood of people trying to get in so the compensation is subject to supply & demand. As you become a more experienced associate, they will raise your pay. A top associate may make 200k in NYC if they have a few firms of their own coverage. At the analyst level, it’s a whole new payscale. Anyhow, you should take a look at your motives to do ER and how enthusiastically you want this position. Those are typically the deciding factors for picking from a pool of qualified candidates. Oh, and I def agree with Numi.
my motives to do ER are that a. I’ve done it before (6 months) b. they’re asking me to come in to cover a sector of which i work in corporate finance for hence i think 80k+ starting is very reasonable since i will be able to add value from DAY 1 since I know exactly what i’m talking about
I had your background (passed all cfa levels, 2 years in the actual sector) + a masters degree and got offered 65 base (in Baltimore)
Oh, and look up the word “motives” unless you’re saying the two reasons you want to do er simply revolve around having related background. In which case, revisit my discussion on motives.