Sell Side Trading (not prop) vs Associate PM on buy side
I posted this as a response to another post, but am posting it here again (with some additions) because I am confused between sell side trading (not prop) and a portfolio associate/ associate PM kind of role on buy-side. I have some sell side research/strategy experience.
"I am not sure why a stint at a Mutual Fund/ Asset Mgmt firm won't be better- assuming you're in a junior PM kind of position vs trading on sell side (flow, not prop). This is because sell side trading is extremely limited to a specific product within a specific group (e.g. 15 year ARMs) while MF/AM could be broader (whole MBS universe). Also, you won't get a track record on the sell side flow desk. However, associate PM positions tend to be very support oriented without much investment idea generation or PM, and it could take a lot of time to be a PM from that position. But then again, it can take a lot of position to be a PM starting from sell side trading also.
Any comments?
sell side flow trader = their own book so there's a track record which bonuses are paid out on by the way
Okay, is that track record transferable/ quotable when you want move to buy-side?
Personally, I would take associate PM any day... I have seen and interviewed a lot of people who have been irrevocably corrupted by their sell side flow experience. Obviously, not everyone succumbs, but it's especially dangerous for juniors, who are often not fully equipped to think critically.
If you're looking to eventually get into a PM role on the buy side, go for the MF/AM route. Much much better odds of making it that way, IMHO.
Do you mean AM is better prep than flow trading for HF exits into the macro space or the fundamental equity space? This OP's comment was in a thread about macro funds, where everyone was telling that other OP that flow trading in rates/fx was a better route than a rates/fx investment analyst in a bond mutual fund/asset manager...
Also to be completely frank, it seems (from my admittedly limited but still quite wide) sample that the kids who land in BB flow trading (not sales - that's another story) are sharper and better pedigreed than those who land in fixed income AM (like BlackRock, for example). Of course the absolute smartest kids out of undergrad head to Citadel and DE Shaw, but just by quality of talent it feels like BB flow trading > FI AM.
That's also why I'd like to know if you're talking about equity AM (e.g. Ruane Cunniff level of shop) or FI AM (e.g. BlackRock). I can see an RCG investment analyst > equity flow trader, but I'd say a rates/fx flow trader > average BlackRock hire.
Blackrock is a huge firm, so it really depends on what role you're talking about. Sell side flow trading is more difficult than getting PAG at Blackrock, but PMG (portfolio management) is definitely more selective than sell side trading. Also, the big AM firms that do hire undergrads (capital group, dodge and cox, fidelity, wellington, MFS) are a lot more selective than sell side as well.
I am talking about rates/FX, i.e. macro space.
I guess I do agree with you that it would depend on what sort of a buyside institution the OP is referring to.
what sort of buyside firm are you referring to, then? OP said mutual funds, and even if we are talking blackrock pmg or even one of the selective ones like Wellington or capital group, how many people at brevan Moore or glg are from one of those places vs sell side trading?
edit: read another of your posts and would be interested to hear your take on how flow trading makes people "unfit for buyside consumption". And what exactly do you do if you don't mind my asking - what's micro RV? (commodities guy here, sorry)
I was thinking more of a hedge fund style environment. From what I heard, in terms of the exposure and experience, the real money places vary wildly. As to the people at Brevan etc, yes, I agree, currently the majority of them are definitely from the sellside.
As to my other comment, it's just something that I have observed throughout the process of interviewing a lot of candidates, the majority of whom are currently on the sellside. A lot of them don't have an understanding of why and how they make money; they have no process, no method. One sample anecdote I can offer is a guy I interviewed, whom I asked about the way he thinks about and analyzes trades. The response was smth along the lines of "Well, I don't know. How does Brahms compose his symponies?". This phenomenon, in my experience, is a relatively common problem these days.
As to myself, I do fixed income relative value, mostly; not necessarily micro.
uh APM role any day... and I'd take an investment role in AM over sell side even as an analyst let alone a role with PM duty
Perspiciatis animi sint consequuntur eum est eos quia. Minus est a numquam amet amet. Error quasi sit ratione doloremque cupiditate et consequatur. Esse illum dolorum magni reiciendis reprehenderit culpa tempore.
Voluptas eaque consequatur nisi quia sit architecto. Vel dolor commodi repellat delectus tenetur sed deleniti. Sed reprehenderit ea dolorem quibusdam. Laboriosam laudantium blanditiis qui et iste tenetur iure. Voluptatum nulla possimus ratione deserunt maiores nam doloremque. Et enim est corrupti pariatur rerum animi omnis.
Ab eos dolorum mollitia consequatur. Nemo sapiente qui sapiente ut voluptatem architecto. Dolorem cupiditate consequuntur id fuga. Omnis a nihil est non aut sapiente tempora.
Eum tenetur voluptatem qui maxime hic et. Omnis dolor atque et omnis. Dolor asperiores minus cumque quod qui. Ea blanditiis est dolorem nemo. Nemo est eum qui.
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...