I could go on, but you have to look at the probability of success in these roles and what it means (and the risk of failure at HF is real, much more real than IB). What would I rather be? Well that's easy because I'm already at a HF and I would take the HF route (and have been in the field for a while).ġ) it is hard to get into the top HF's out of undergradĢ) the risk around a HF is much higher (in pay but also just job security)ģ) the skill set you learn at a HF (obviously varies by firm) is more limited (or is perceived to be more limited) than a more generalist in IB4) the non competes are much stricter in the HF spaceĥ) the stress associated with HFs, in my opinion, is higher and everyday there is more work than you can get through. Again the IB path here is a bit more defined (up until senior VP/MD where comp across people diverges significantly). some people will still be around $300-400k, while others will be 7 figures). But really after about 5-7 years on the quant side the differences in comp between the top people and the average is large, and it is way too hard to predict this well (I.e. The IB path is a bit more defined if you can get into PE, etc, and more stable, while the vol in quant is higher, and if you are doing alpha research the ceiling is also higher than "pure IB". Additionally, quant funds will tend to have non competes, so that'll also be something to think through.Īs for comp, entry level will be higher in quant but with fewer opportunities (as these are really only the top firms). The thing to keep in mind here is around future opportunities, IB is a bit more general and after a 2 year stint as an analyst you have the business school/ VC/ HF/ PE options, while quant is a bit more specific and you will generally have fewer exit opportunities (especially at the level of pay). career path/upward mobility within firm - will also be difficult to answer. It'll be difficult to get an answer on this culture - this is firm dependent, team dependent, etc. Things that'll be hard to get a good answer on: Similarly, IB covers a lot so you might want to be more specific. So the answers you'll get are pretty different. Even being more specific around "quant researcher/signals research" at a HF, can be pretty different (time horizons, how "mathy" the role is, asset classes, systematic vs pure quant, etc).
I say this because no matter how smart you are, if you don't truly enjoy the work you'll get leapfrogged by people who are just as smart but love what they do (or close to it).Īnother thing to keep in mind is that "quant" is a word that is thrown around and means different things to different people. So you might already have this information but I think you are missing the most important questions around what the work is like so that you can figure out whether or not you'll enjoy it.
0 kommentar(er)
