I’m currently interning in equity research with a senior analyst, and I’m trying to get a better idea of my chance for receiving a full-time offer. There are currently two associates working with this analyst, and the analyst currently covers 15 companies but is in the process of increasing this number to 20+. How often does a senior analyst have three associates/associate analysts under him?
Where I worked on the sell side, it was typically 1 Senior, 1 Associate (MBA and/or CFA), and 1 Junior (pre-MBA, working towards CFA). Sometimes there would be 1 Senior and 2 Juniors or, more rarely, 1 Senior and 2 Associates. Are either of the “associates” non-MBAs? If so, you might be able to ‘slide into cougars spot’ once they have done their time there. If you are comfortable talking to them, simply ask what their goals are career/education wise.
I’ve found it really depends on the size of the bank. At a larger bank like GS or MS a team with three or even four associates is not unusual depending on the sector. At a boutique usually only one, maybe two associates. But agree with XSellSide I have not seen many teams increase in size in this market usually the reverse, so the best bet to get in is if a slot opens up or if there may be another senior in a related sector looking to fill a slot.
“slide into cougars spot” is a classic line, thank you for letting me steal that and abuse it all over the place
They are both non-MBAs, but one has roughly 10 years experience (he’s classified as an associate analyst) on both the sell-side and buy-side. The other is more in-line with my experience. He is a non-MBA, but he has a couple years of sell-side experience (he just started with this analyst, his prior analyst was laid off).
bump…any more thoughts?
Typically… 1 Sr, 1 Regular and 1 Jr or 1 Sr and 2 regular
“Typically… 1 Sr, 1 Regular and 1 Jr or 1 Sr and 2 regular” Sigh…that sucks.
Where’s King Hippo and Super Macho Man?
I’m interning at bank. It seems like each senior gets one associate. Harsh times.
I’ve been an Associate at two middle market investment banks and typically (I speak for boutique/middle market size banks) you’ll see a total of one person on a team per 10 stocks covered. At my last job we followed 34 companies and had an MD, a Sr. Analyst and an Associate (me). Where I am currently, We cover 23 companies and it’s just my MD and myself, however, our Jr. Associate (undergrad UofChicago, and just got his MBA) was just let go in December. Despite my private bank having a stellar year, we let 10+ percent of the workforce (mostly back office) go, and cut comp across the board. I am paid what I believe to be about 50 percent below market, and have been at this same level for 3 years. I guess it’s my own fault for still working here, but at least I’ve kept my job in this market. Awesome. Things are tough all over.
A little off topic here, but I guess you are the right audience to run this by. I was at the charter dinner and there was an analyst (maybe an associate) who was receiving his charter after 10 years in the program. I was a bit taken aback by that admission. I thought analyst/associations were the brightest and the best. Whenever I read reports, I am impressed with the analysis and opinion. My perception is that you have to think critically, write well and be a guru in DCF and excel. Are there exceptions to this? This guy just didnt seem overly bright - and that says something coming from me!
I wouldn’t say that analysts need to be exceptionally bright. The best ones probably are, but don’t underestimate the amount of times people can get ahead through brown-nosing and good networking. I’m sure a lot of people here have encountered people in their careers that have made them scratch their heads as to how they managed to climb so high up the corporate ladder.
Carson Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I wouldn’t say that analysts need to be > exceptionally bright. The best ones probably are, > but don’t underestimate the amount of times people > can get ahead through brown-nosing and good > networking. I’m sure a lot of people here have > encountered people in their careers that have made > them scratch their heads as to how they managed to > climb so high up the corporate ladder. exactly…a lot of people in a number of fields aren’t exceptionally capable at what they do, but they know how to game the system
Carson Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I wouldn’t say that analysts need to be > exceptionally bright. The best ones probably are, > but don’t underestimate the amount of times people > can get ahead through brown-nosing and good > networking. I’m sure a lot of people here have > encountered people in their careers that have made > them scratch their heads as to how they managed to > climb so high up the corporate ladder. Sure, that happens everywhere and we normally work for these individuals. But I thought the hiding places as an analyst would be far fewer. You have to be able to write reports and put together spreadsheets. I would have thought you have to produce, produce, produce in such an environment. It seems not. I ask from the disinterested point of view as a potential applicant one day but had figured if I didnt know a valuation model back to front (as is often discussed on these boards), I would be rejected out of hand in an interview. And seeing as being able to deconstruct the earnings model and variants thereof make up much of the CFA syllabus, I thought all analysts would walk the exams hence the original post. So could I hypothetically one day transition into the role of an analyst…? I have my CFA charter, I have a real finance job, im mid 30s. Or is it the preserve of the college grad? Id love to do that kind of analysis on a daily basis. My modelling/valuation sucks. Use it or lose it.