Can anyone provide some more detail on the differences between these two tracks in terms of the type of work, culture, background of analysts (the recent grad type) that go into them. I understand that an investment analyst basically supports the PM and research jr analyst supports the sr analyst but im looking for a little more in terms of the intangibles such as personality types that are drawn to each, motivations for being there, etc. These are in the context of the Asset Management arm of a BB bank. Thanks!
I have a limited understanding of this, but from what I know, a research analyst is responsible for researching a particular sector of the equity market, while an Investment Analyst analyzes multiple asset classes and performs manager due diligence on behalf of the PM. So at an asset management shop, the IA would help determine which assets the portfolio should invest in as well as if, and to whom, the PM should dedicate assets (to a HF, for example). The IA position to me seems like a half way point between portfolio management and a pure analytical role.
thanks brominion … anyone else currently in one of these roles that can give more input? i’m basically hesitant about the IA role as it seems to be heavily operational as opposed to analytical. clearly research will be more analytical, but i’m looking for a half-way point.
thems Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > thanks brominion … anyone else currently in one > of these roles that can give more input? > > i’m basically hesitant about the IA role as it > seems to be heavily operational as opposed to > analytical. clearly research will be more > analytical, but i’m looking for a half-way point. I think it depends. I am in the process of interviewing for an IA position and the firm has been very clear that I will be analyzing a variety of asset classes as well as specific equities and fixed income securities. On top of that, I will get to help with asset allocation and meeting with clients to discuss performance and address needs, etc. It doesn’t seem operational at all to me, but I suppose the role will vary from firm to firm.
I would say the IA position is going to be broader as you will look at things like individual equities but also HFs, etfs, structured products, etc…whereas the Jr Analyst is going to be focusing on a small group of companies and being able to disect, model, and follow them. So all in all I think the Jr position makes sense if you want to dive deep on companies and focus on them, the IA makes sense if you want the more overreaching view of the portfolio and its components. I think both are totally valid. Myself, I prefer the IA as I am not turned on by analyzing 10-20 companies continuously(although I see a definite need for it). Hope that helps.
great advice – thanks to you both.
I don’t think these jobs titles are well defined consistently. I’m a junior analyst, but on my business card and HR record i’m just Investment Analyst. I cover energy for a couple of funds. I have a co worker who is assigned to a specfic fund who picks up the odd and ends names, I think he is consdiered an Investment Analyst but it looks the same from our business cards.
That’s true buddha, and I have seen “Investment Analyst” jobs that are basically administrative. I think one should tread carefully when applying for these sort of jobs and make sure that expectations are crystal clear going into the role so that you are not disappointed after taking the job.
Bump. Any other thoughts on this?
My title is Investment Analyst. But my work is a lot of administration. I do work on some analytical projects from time to time but I consider this a MO role.