^^^ yah, that’s right. I always thought “chop shop” should have been a better analogy for structured products, since that is more akin to buying a car and stripping it for parts.
I_Passed_Level_1 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > MattLikesAnalysis Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > i’m pretty certain in toronto with 3-4 years > > experience and “research associate” you’d > expect > > 65k + bonus of 10-20%. so i think 70k USD for a > > non-NYC job is reasonable. probably north of > 100k > > if in NYC. > > this cant be right dude, I know accountants who > make much more than this after 3-4 years. exactly the problem. the ratio of CFAs to CFA positions is at a worldwide high in T.O. whereas the exact opposite is true for CAs and CA positions.
I_Passed_Level_1 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > this cant be right dude, I know accountants who > make much more than this after 3-4 years. and I know people with CFA + MBA + 5 yrs of MM sell side equity associate experience making $80k all-in. Then again, he was laid off from a high paying job and is now working for some lower paying position. Job market has changed…hopefully not permanently
The problem is that such a wide variety of people are L3 candidates, ranging from CFOs to IBankers and traders, to operations people and noobs who are trying to “break into finance”. Because of that, any kind of salary comparison based on L3 candidacy alone is not very useful.
To the OP original question: Passed lvl 2 with zero applicable experience, I’d pay him 10~15% LESS than a fresh recruit undergrad from a top-20 reputable business school specializing in finance. Reason: I’d have to train the person either way, I’d rather pick a young guy who is fresh and moldable than an aspiring career switcher who has to unlearn his previous job first. Based on that I’d say $45k to $54k base, bonus base on performance.
^^ Wanna hire me?
Unfortunately, I am not at a position to be hiring people. And sadly, the reason I cited was the same reasons cited to me when I was brought on board a few years ago (at similar pay cut % relative to new grads) But yea, passing lvl 2 will open doors, but don’t expect much on pay.
Agree with Kevin that this is the standard range for US (not in NY) based on my experience. You may as well think of the position as entry level in my opinion, because if you have 3-4 years experience (investment or industry, doesn’t matter) you are probably not taking a junior analyst job. Think of it compared to a first year IB analyst. I’d say that in an average year a first year IB analyst makes around $90k all in on average in the US (NY more, Boise less). Somebody in buy side research will make less starting out, maybe 75% of that so in the 60-70k range all int. The point is definitely not how much you make starting out, since at that point supply is high relative to demand. Supply is low for people who are actually good at investing, have proven that fact and can communicate that to clients, so focus on getting your foot in the door and then own.
eureka Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I was curious, because I’ve never been to Kansas > City. > > American Century Investment Analyst Salary: > http://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/American-Century-I > nvestment-Analyst-Salaries-E6668_D_KO17,35.htm > > It says about $125k all in for an investment > analyst. I’m not sure how they break out titles > there, but I assume that is above a junior > analyst. The $70-100k range for a junior analyst > (I’m thinking right out of college) actually seems > a little high by comparison. Couldn’t find any > good data for SunAmerica, which is probably the > other major firm? Like I said, no real idea about > Kansas City. I’ve been to St. Louis once > though…good ribs/beer/blues. > > > Keep in mind: two things guys are most like to lie > about is amount of salary and number of women with > whom they’ve slept. Ivy/Waddell & Reed is the other one. Buffalo Funds and UMB Scout have their offices here as well. But I only know what Jr analysts make at Ivy and American Century. That link is fairly accurate for a Jr analyst position. Keep in mind though, neither Ivy nor American Century would hire anyone straight out of college for an analyst position though. They’re not paying a kid straight out of college that money. The other thing to consider is salary vs. variable compensation. Analysts at both firms are given a target range for their total yearly compensation (salary plus bonuses). They rarely if ever fall below that range but knock it out of the park every now and then. $160k for the lowest analyst on the totem pole is about right. Again though, this isn’t some kid straight out of college. We’re talking either five years industry experience and/or Harvard/Princeton/Wharton/Chicago MBA. And, just about all of them are charterholders to boot. I’d have to double check but I don’t think we have a single analyst that doesn’t have his/her full charter. The only people that don’t are the old portfolio managers.
Something else to consider is the way in which you’re variable compensation is determined. For example, say your target range is total annual comp of $140k-160k: If you work at Ivy you’re payed based on your security recommendations regardless of what the overall portfolio does. They track what you recommend to buy and sell and take a look at your total performance even if the portfolio manager ignored your suggestion and didn’t buy a stock you recommended. If you had a great year you would be at or near $160k. If your picks sucked then you’d be closer to $140. At American Century analysts are paid based on how their portfolios do, specifically based on their fund’s information ratio with heavier weighting on the 3 and 5 year numbers. This is obviously more of a team approach and (hopefully) facilitates open discussion and better examination of the portfolios holdings (everyone has a stake in it). The outcome is the same though. If your fund is good then you earn closer to your top range or vise versa. Both firms generally have a few Jr analysts that really nail it and make over $200k. But that’s an outlier.
^^^^I get what you are saying. I think the term “junior analyst” at these firms is probably somewhat non-standard for the industry (at least in my experience). Given this is in Kansas City, it seems that the junior analysts at these firms are much more seasoned than most junior analysts at my firm or at the other firms in which I’ve worked. I do not think the OP should take this as representative of the US market.
For the person stating a New college grad would earn more then the person with a few years of experience + Level 2. I think that logic completely ignores the level of polish you earn in the first few years of working. The person with a few years of experience will have an edge with clients and how to perform well in meetings. Call it confidence or maturity, there is certainly a difference. I think this is a pretty easy concept to sell if you are still in the late 20s to early 30s with plenty of years left to work. In the least, this should be part of your “hire me” argument.
no experience? entry level pay
srwarrington Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I sort of agree with you. Even if your past experience has not polished your people skills, being older gives you some sort of weird intangible credibility that is attractive to potential employers. I can say with relative certainty that people hired for my job who are 10 years older than me get paid slightly more than I do. Also consider that younger people are willing to work for far less money, so why pay them more?
Junior analysts at no name firms pulling down 300K in Kansas?? Totally believable. No wonder it’s such a hotbed for the rich and famous. I can only imagine if Fidelity opened an office in KC, Warren Buffett would be knocking down the door for a mail clerk job.
^ well played.
iheartiheartmath Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Junior analysts at no name firms pulling down 300K > in Kansas?? Totally believable. No wonder it’s > such a hotbed for the rich and famous. I can only > imagine if Fidelity opened an office in KC, Warren > Buffett would be knocking down the door for a mail > clerk job. Nice, like what I was saying but more sarcastic, funny and provoking. Sounded like BS…
Hello Mister Walrus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Also consider that younger people are willing to > work for far less money, so why pay them more? No arguments there if the 2 candidates have similar career tracks. Young grads have career placement offices in their schools feeding them “average salary is this for this type of job” so the offer is a lot less negotiable. Whereas if there’s an IT/engineer/backoffice type dying to switch to a different role, I can low ball that person. I’m just saying. If I have to pay a fixed price for a fresh grad but I can negotiate price for a career switcher then I would try to low ball the career switcher first. If the career switcher insists on getting paid higher than a fresh grad, then I’ll go w/ the fresh grad. I understand the level of polish any job experience would bring, but how often do entry level analysts make significant impact in client meetings? Not to mention, its a lot harder to ask a person who’s used to a 40 hr back office job to all of a sudden work erratic hours.
kevin0118 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hello Mister Walrus Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > > Also consider that younger people are willing > to > > work for far less money, so why pay them more? > > No arguments there if the 2 candidates have > similar career tracks. Young grads have career > placement offices in their schools feeding them > “average salary is this for this type of job” so > the offer is a lot less negotiable. Whereas if > there’s an IT/engineer/backoffice type dying to > switch to a different role, I can low ball that > person. > > I’m just saying. If I have to pay a fixed price > for a fresh grad but I can negotiate price for a > career switcher then I would try to low ball the > career switcher first. If the career switcher > insists on getting paid higher than a fresh grad, > then I’ll go w/ the fresh grad. > > I understand the level of polish any job > experience would bring, but how often do entry > level analysts make significant impact in client > meetings? Not to mention, its a lot harder to ask > a person who’s used to a 40 hr back office job to > all of a sudden work erratic hours. Kevin, great posts! I have slowly realized that this will be my path when I finally break into IM. Its frustrating seeing people from college get in the door to a firm that I would die to work at, but that is how it goes. Truth is if I had to work 3-6months for free to break into an equity analyst/IB role, I’d do it in a heart beat without second thoughts.
MattLikesAnalysis Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I_Passed_Level_1 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > MattLikesAnalysis Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > i’m pretty certain in toronto with 3-4 years > > > experience and “research associate” you’d > > expect > > > 65k + bonus of 10-20%. so i think 70k USD for > a > > > non-NYC job is reasonable. probably north of > > 100k > > > if in NYC. > > > > this cant be right dude, I know accountants who > > make much more than this after 3-4 years. > > > exactly the problem. the ratio of CFAs to CFA > positions is at a worldwide high in T.O. whereas > the exact opposite is true for CAs and CA > positions. WHAT??? Im assuming you’re not in the business. I am, and in Canada, and I would quit if I was making ~$80k all in. You’re way off base…