|

How much does a new SS ER analyst get these days?

Say if you make the right move as an associate and get promoted… what type of pay can you expect starting out? Let’s say in NYC, since they’ll be more data points. Is there a wide range depending on BB/MM/Boutique? 

We’re gonna win so much, you may even get tired of winning. And you’ll say, 'Please, please. It’s too much winning. We can’t take it anymore. Mr. President, it’s too much.' And I’ll say, 'No, it isn’t!' We have to keep winning!

not a lot of bonus these days, I was offered around 135k base with 30-45k targetted bonus at a relatively large shop. Not great when you take into consideration of the work schedule versus buyside roles. 

About tree fiddy.

Seriously though, good question. It’s something I too have been wondering. I’d like to go to ER, but I hear it’s just a dead/dying industry. Would I work 80 hours a week for $100K+ pay and a $30K-$40K bonus? You’re damn straight I would, but that’s because of where I live. Tennessee has a very low cost of living and that would allow me to live like a king. That salary would get me a really nice 5 bedroom house, with a pool, an outdoor kitchen, and several other nice things.

That’s NYC pay, my friend at goldman starting out only like 70k in Utah LOL but still saving more than guys in NY probably because of low COL.

 that sucks for the amount of hours worked and living in NYC.

Look at glass door. Also Wallstreet oasis just released their compensation survey, but I think it was just buyside 

Eh, why do so many people want to do ER then? That’s less than most “front office” jobs.

“Visit the Water Cooler forum on Analyst Forum. It is the best forum.”
- Everyone

ohai wrote:

Eh, why do so many people want to do ER then? That’s less than most “front office” jobs.

I suppose for most people it’s about the money. For me it’s more about doing what I enjoy and not so much about the money (although it does play a role). I also thought it always sounded cool when I was a teenager. I just enjoy doing research and analysis on companies, so why not do what you like and learn to better your investing skills at the same time?

At this point in the industry life cycle. I think it’s beyond the money and doing something you’re genuinely interested in, can do for a long time, and don’t have to drag yourself into work everyday. 

"Verdict: TRUE" - Fact Check

Thanks for the thoughts… trying to figure out a plan so very helpful.

We’re gonna win so much, you may even get tired of winning. And you’ll say, 'Please, please. It’s too much winning. We can’t take it anymore. Mr. President, it’s too much.' And I’ll say, 'No, it isn’t!' We have to keep winning!

ohai wrote:

Eh, why do so many people want to do ER then? That’s less than most “front office” jobs.

But I suspect it’s also less stressful than other front office jobs. I know of analysts who seem to only work 30 hours a week outside of earnings. And there is not nearly as much accountability for being wrong while still being involved in investing. 

“And there is not nearly as much accountability for being wrong while still being involved in investing.”  

You could say that there is more accountability for mistakes in front office jobs but I totally disagree about the “not nearly as much” statement, given the fact that when you put out an ER piece you have hundreds or even thousands of institutional investors and paying retail clients that are scrutinizing your work, and just a few errors will lead to a loss of credibility followed by swift termination, which is the same outcome a buy-side guy would face for making an avoidable mistake that negatively impacts performance.

"It's one thing to remember, another to know. Remembering is merely safeguarding something entrusted to memory; knowing, however, means making everything your own; it means not depending upon the copy and not all the time glancing back at the master."

thanatos0320 wrote:

house, with a pool, an outdoor kitchen, 

outdoor kitchens overlooking the pool are sickkk..

next level stuff is swim up to kitchen bar

"A theory that you can't explain to a bartender is probably no damn good."
- Ernest Rutherford

ConvexPayoff wrote:

“And there is not nearly as much accountability for being wrong while still being involved in investing.”  

You could say that there is more accountability for mistakes in front office jobs but I totally disagree about the “not nearly as much” statement, given the fact that when you put out an ER piece you have hundreds or even thousands of institutional investors and paying retail clients that are scrutinizing your work, and just a few errors will lead to a loss of credibility followed by swift termination, which is the same outcome a buy-side guy would face for making an avoidable mistake that negatively impacts performance.

I’ve never seen that happen. Even this guy is still around, but maybe the associate got fired. 

http://businessinsider.com/morgan-stanley-corrected-snapchat-researc...

Definitely less accountability on the sell-side. Most of the calls are bullish, just follow the crowd basically, downgrade when it’s already too late. I seen plenty of people with subpar track record on the sellside still at their jobs, this would never happen on the buyside if you are constantly messing up. 

klaudnine wrote:

Definitely less accountability on the sell-side. Most of the calls are bullish, just follow the crowd basically, downgrade when it’s already too late. I seen plenty of people with subpar track record on the sellside still at their jobs, this would never happen on the buyside if you are constantly messing up. 

Exactly because you can add value in other, arguably easier ways like being tight with management teams. 

Research tends to be considered a perk that comes with other services. Corporate access is also a big deal, as stated above. So, I am not sure how investors will respond when they are required to separate research fees from other costs.

“Visit the Water Cooler forum on Analyst Forum. It is the best forum.”
- Everyone

ohai wrote:

Research tends to be considered a perk that comes with other services. Corporate access is also a big deal, as stated above. So, I am not sure how investors will respond when they are required to separate research fees from other costs.

I think the sell-side’s offering of corporate access has and will continue to be diminished.  Part of the function of a sell-side analyst was a glorified exec assistant; setting up calls and meetings with top management.  

However, most public firms now have a formal IR department, which makes the outreach efforts substantially easier for the buyside.  The buyside will still be slow to change (first time officially working for a big shop I was shocked at how much they still relied on sell-side research services), but it is happening.

That’s interesting. However, from what I see in financial services, clients also tend to react towards product that is pushed to them, rather than proactively seek opportunities. So, they are more likely to participate in a corporate access event because JPM has already organized it and asks them to just sign up, rather than take the initiative to call up the company’s management themselves. If bank sponsored corporate access declines, clients will probably increase their outreach somewhat, but not to the extent that it fully makes up for the change.

“Visit the Water Cooler forum on Analyst Forum. It is the best forum.”
- Everyone

ohai wrote:

That’s interesting. However, from what I see in financial services, clients also tend to react towards product that is pushed to them, rather than proactively seek opportunities. So, they are more likely to participate in a corporate access event because JPM has already organized it and asks them to just sign up, rather than take the initiative to call up the company’s management themselves. If bank sponsored corporate access declines, clients will probably increase their outreach somewhat, but not to the extent that it fully makes up for the change.

Agreed.  Buyside can be fairly reactive and not proactive.  Still, it’s not a great outlook for the sell-side as their business will continue to shrink.  I also forgot to mention the various 3rd party IR firms that, while much more promotional, are taking more and more of that corporate access function away.

Well, I have noticed that a lot of weird, no name conference organizers have called over the past year or two to promote some event or another. In my field, it is not so much of company research though, but “risk conferences”, effects of CCAR, or other stuff like that. I thought it was just one time things, but come to think of it, I never got that many invitations of this type from this sort of company a few years ago. I wonder if this is a thing now. 

“Visit the Water Cooler forum on Analyst Forum. It is the best forum.”
- Everyone

I was surprised to read this thread and not hear a single mention of MiFiD II. For anyone here on the sell-side, how are you thinking about its implications, both in terms of the broader industry and also specifically at your firm?

numi wrote:

I was surprised to read this thread and not hear a single mention of MiFiD II. For anyone here on the sell-side, how are you thinking about its implications, both in terms of the broader industry and also specifically at your firm?

It seemed like it may impact the way the largest buyside  guys think about research. But it didn’t seem to have a direct impact on the firm yet. When we would market in Europe, we got mixed feedback from clients. But that plus a few other factors are why I personally decided the sell side is not where I should invest my energy. At least what I saw, the majority of sell side operates in a gray area which regulators are slowly closing in on. And since most of the analysts focus on those gray areas, as opposed to publishing good research, I think it  is too much work to find a good analyst in my industry. 

The corporate action topic above was related to MIFID 2, although no one said so explicitly. I’m not in research, but I suspect most people will say the same thing - it’s just more bad news. Even if the US will not be directly affected in the short term, cost pressure and potential future disruption to their business model are unlikely to be positive. As far as I can tell, banks are trying to reassure their staff by saying that they will remain committed to the business (unless you are DB, in which case, management is blatant about their contempt for their own employees), but it’s impossible to deny that business uncertainty has increased.

“Visit the Water Cooler forum on Analyst Forum. It is the best forum.”
- Everyone

^ thanks ohai, I agree with this. I also see every day the trends that you and CFABLACKBELT described earlier with respect to corporate access. Yes, investors tend to be more reactive rather than proactive in terms of meetings that have already been organized by someone else and all you have to do is show up….but with most banks still getting overpaid in trades relative to the value they produce (e.g. does a large-cap name *really* need 40+ coverage analysts? and if they offer more value than just research, which some do and some don’t, how do we decide which broker-driven NDR or corporate access meeting we should actually attend?), I think all buy-side firms are going to have to take a closer look at how they pay for stuff, and they’ll evolve to being more proactive about directly reaching out to company management teams (which is easier for the larger funds to set up, of course; tougher for smaller funds but they aren’t the ones generating tons of trades in the first place). Ultimately, I think the reality is that some banks are going to ask for too much $$ relative to the value they create and are going to likely be disappointed by the new compensation structure.

Interesting to read about MIFID2 on here. I’m not high level enough to hear anything other than “differentiated reserach”, “investing in our people”, ect ect, already plotting my next move!

We’re gonna win so much, you may even get tired of winning. And you’ll say, 'Please, please. It’s too much winning. We can’t take it anymore. Mr. President, it’s too much.' And I’ll say, 'No, it isn’t!' We have to keep winning!

For those still on the SS, seems you have 30 months breathing room on MiFID II.

https://wsj.com/articles/wall-street-skirts-worst-fallout-from-eu-la...

https://bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-10-29/wall-street-analysts-explore-a-new-career-path

SS to IR… I’ve seen a few analyst make this move. I’d be interested if the numbers were right. I assume less stress and less hours?

We’re gonna win so much, you may even get tired of winning. And you’ll say, 'Please, please. It’s too much winning. We can’t take it anymore. Mr. President, it’s too much.' And I’ll say, 'No, it isn’t!' We have to keep winning!

SS to  IR is a good move if you don’t give a **** about investing i guess… I’ve come across a few people on the company’s side, they tend to be more knowledgeable about my questions so I can see why companies take on ex-ss analysts to be on their IR team. 

RIP bchad - the long-winded peacemaker of AF

^Nice article!