Based on the M&A and sector coverage group within BofA, which group is best for a PE/HF exit? Is it better to be a sector generalist especially if maybe you are interested in infra/energy fund rather than vanilla PE?
| +164 | Is the Bay better than NYC, if so why? | 56 | 45m | |
| +149 | Why are UK, UK based and UK-countries related (India, Nigeria...) students so cringe on LinkedIn? | 57 | 20h | |
| +106 | Analysts bitching on WSO | 24 | 3d | |
| +83 | How are women treated in IB? | 55 | 2h | |
| +65 | How to Not Feel Anxious About SA Internship | 24 | 12h | |
| +56 | College Transitions updated 2024 IB ranking | 23 | 10h | |
| +53 | In denial about SA 2025 Offer | 12 | 23h | |
| +48 | Does my budget look right? Fresh grad | 28 | 12h | |
| +44 | Having trouble telling people where I work | 20 | 12h | |
| +43 | 5 days/wk | 19 | 3d |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
Bump
Being in an industry group absolutely does not limit your ability to exit into another industry whatsoever. You just have to demonstrate a level of thoughtfulness and genuine interest in your targeted exit industry group and it won’t matter. 90% of the modeling is the same (unless you’re only working on insurance or banks) and all of the basic skills (understanding how a deal process works, being able to do the ground level BS work like managing the VDR, PPT skills, etc.) are 100% transferable.
Nonetheless, my personal opinion is that generalist M&A is a better experience if you’re more focused on gaining a deeper level of modeling experience. But don’t be scared about working coverage.
Thank you for the insight; I see your point about the skills being transferable.
Does working in M&A in whatever BB results in more modelling exposure relative to industry groups?
It really depends on the group structure. In some M&A teams, you're only working on 'legal stuff' and not much modelling as the sector teams cover that. The reason is that the M&A team rarely holds the client's relationship and generally lacks industry-specific knowledge (although the M&A team may be on client calls regardless). Honestly depends on how strong the industry team is at modelling M&A. If at BofA most of the M&A modelling is outsourced to the M&A team then that's great, otherwise, a strong coverage team may even offer more exposure.
Have read ok things about healthcare, industries and M&A in London. Idk how up-to-date that is
M&A and HC are the best in terms of reputation, with HC having the best WLB. TMT and NatRes are good (particularly the latter) but sweaty
Any insight on the London levfin team?
Come on, NatRes is not good. Once upon a time they were one of the best on the street but that was like 5+ years ago but somehow they manage to hold the reputation. Neither the energy team nor the power team is even middle tier anymore and can’t recall a single major transaction either of them were on.
Would say the mining guys are solid (although previous head left) and have good culture but it’s a relatively small sector. The overall team still places well in infra but if you’re looking for traditional PE exits or actual deal experience, pick a different team.
The bofa internship is generalist and you won’t get put in a team
Any insights on the sponsors team?
Amet velit cum ducimus ea. Aut impedit beatae quo.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...