Biglaw hours less enough to justify lower comp than Banking? Forum

[notinbiglaw]

Ibanking and biglaw are both very very well paying careers with significant upside if you can last.

The more important question is what suits you better.

[Sackboy]

Ibanking and biglaw are both very very well paying careers with significant upside if you can last.

The more important question is what suits you better.

Yep. These threads are wild to me, because it's clear the motivation is most $$$ for least work. Biglaw and banking are as similar as dentistry and pediatrics. They're both white collar jobs, in the business field, and pay well, but otherwise you're just not doing remotely the same things. Easiest way to find yourself in an unhappy situation is to be picking a field based on $$$. Also, please don't try to say that both interest you, it's much more likely that neither interest you and that you're lying to yourself to chase those stacks.

[notinbiglaw]

Ibanking and biglaw are both very very well paying careers with significant upside if you can last.

The more important question is what suits you better.

Yep. These threads are wild to me, because it's clear the motivation is most $$$ for least work. Biglaw and banking are as similar as dentistry and pediatrics. They're both white collar jobs, in the business field, and pay well, but otherwise you're just not doing remotely the same things. Easiest way to find yourself in an unhappy situation is to be picking a field based on $$$. Also, please don't try to say that both interest you, it's much more likely that neither interest you and that you're lying to yourself to chase those stacks.

To be fair, both interested me and I tried both. I found ibanking to be far more suitable to my personality and skillset.

[Lukky]

(Back) in banking now

The hours are not necessarily worse in banking. There is more variance week to week but overall I don't think bankers work more than junior associates in biglaw transactional groups.

Pay in banking isn't necessarily higher. The base is significantly lower and the bonus is very much tied to...luck. I really want to say performance but honestly, the link isn't that strong. You can be a super star but if your group/firm isn't doing well, you probably aren't getting a big bonus. Conversely, you can be mediocre and still end up with a big bonus if your group/firm did well.

For reference, last week I worked probably about 50-60 hours per week on average but had months where I was clocking 100+ hours per week and I knew I was getting near 100% base as bonus well before the end of the year because my group just crushed it last year on a seemingly unending stream of M&A deals that are just a bit too small for WSJ front page.

Just like in Biglaw, a lot of it is really just learning to say no and getting your work done. A big thing, for me at least, is in banking, you can get your work done very quickly and reward yourself with some free time without feeling the pressure to acquire more work just to clock billable hours.

Hi, curious about your experience transitioning into ibanking (I realize that you had prior ibanking experience). Do you mind sending me a PM to discuss?

[Sackboy]

Ibanking and biglaw are both very very well paying careers with significant upside if you can last.

The more important question is what suits you better.

Yep. These threads are wild to me, because it's clear the motivation is most $$$ for least work. Biglaw and banking are as similar as dentistry and pediatrics. They're both white collar jobs, in the business field, and pay well, but otherwise you're just not doing remotely the same things. Easiest way to find yourself in an unhappy situation is to be picking a field based on $$$. Also, please don't try to say that both interest you, it's much more likely that neither interest you and that you're lying to yourself to chase those stacks.

To be fair, both interested me and I tried both. I found ibanking to be far more suitable to my personality and skillset.

Totally fair but based on these threads, my experience with 0Ls, and generally experience wandering this hellscape for the vast majority of these people it's the $$$. You'll find the same folks over at med schools who all suspiciously want to be ENTs and Ophthalmologists.

[Anonymous User]

I was that hypothetical college senior from HYP (not Econ though, liberal arts), who was weighing HYS against my offer from a finance summer. You're completely right - I don't know anyone who would do a DCF to figure this out. It's at least a little about what you want out of life. I missed reading and thinking about something other than numbers in finance (to be fair, not IB, quant trading). I wanted at least the option of going to government or PI and doing something good or whatnot after a few years.

For what it's worth, from what I can tell biglaw hours have been much much worse than in trading, but a good deal better than what I remember my friends who were IB analysts/associates were pulling. You can kinda see from the policies NYC banks are putting in now that facetime matters that much more in banking.

Ha, not every day you see quant folks here. I was debating prop trading vs law school. Despite the comp, I think I made the right decision -- I don't think I would have stood out by ANY means at a Jane Street or an Optiver.

Honestly liked quant trading for the fun/intellectual challenge, but the end goal felt too much like “make this number bigger.” Saw some stuff behind the scenes that felt kinda wrong, plus the gender discrimination was much, much worse for me than in law.

Came to law school to try to work for the government regulating the industry. Loved interning for fedgov my law school summers…looking forward to going back after doing a few more years in biglaw.

Definitely nice to meet another quant here though. I missed words in finance, but man do I miss being able to talk numbers with classmates. Lawyers seem to be allergic. My friends are still in that world (one Citadel, one SIG, one TwoSigma, one of us at a prop shop in Chicago, none of us got Jane Street lol) and it’s fun to compare notes sometimes (they deal with people with actually negative social skills so…win some lose some).

[anonbanker]

This topic comes up a lot and it never makes any sense.

Biglaw and banking are different job, with different day to day activities, utilizing different skill sets, recruiting from different applicant pools, on different timelines, with different career trajectories, different cultures, and different people want to do them.

Not to beat a dead horse. But, T6 --> banking here

... Which is not uncommon? Law students / lawyers end up in banking (or management consulting) all the time, precisely because there's so much overlap between what these professions look for and demand. Banks have formal recruiting presences at law schools

Obviously that doesn't make this thread any less of an exercise in navel gazing. But what are forums for?

[Anonymous User]

This topic comes up a lot and it never makes any sense.

Biglaw and banking are different job, with different day to day activities, utilizing different skill sets, recruiting from different applicant pools, on different timelines, with different career trajectories, different cultures, and different people want to do them.

Not to beat a dead horse. But, T6 --> banking here

... Which is not uncommon? Law students / lawyers end up in banking (or management consulting) all the time, precisely because there's so much overlap between what these professions look for and demand. Banks have formal recruiting presences at law schools

Obviously that doesn't make this thread any less of an exercise in navel gazing. But what are forums for?

No one ever said it never happens, just that it is uncommon (and certainly not common enough to affect industry-wide compensation, as OP was implying, a few counterexamples here and there notwithstanding), and for those who are making the decision, it is not the overly simplistic argument the OP made where bankers work X% more and make Y% less, so therefore "biglaw compensation is fairly priced at the moment."

We can quibble about the exact number of people who are actively making the decision, but as someone who made the jump, surely you'll agree there are more factors at play when comparing the two than what OP laid out. Can't we just expect slightly higher quality navel gazing than the OP?

[Anonymous User]

This topic comes up a lot and it never makes any sense.

Biglaw and banking are different job, with different day to day activities, utilizing different skill sets, recruiting from different applicant pools, on different timelines, with different career trajectories, different cultures, and different people want to do them.

Not to beat a dead horse. But, T6 --> banking here

... Which is not uncommon? Law students / lawyers end up in banking (or management consulting) all the time, precisely because there's so much overlap between what these professions look for and demand. Banks have formal recruiting presences at law schools

Obviously that doesn't make this thread any less of an exercise in navel gazing. But what are forums for?

No one ever said it never happens, just that it is uncommon (and certainly not common enough to affect industry-wide compensation, as OP was implying, a few counterexamples here and there notwithstanding), and for those who are making the decision, it is not the overly simplistic argument the OP made where bankers work X% more and make Y% less, so therefore "biglaw compensation is fairly priced at the moment."

We can quibble about the exact number of people who are actively making the decision, but as someone who made the jump, surely you'll agree there are more factors at play when comparing the two than what OP laid out. Can't we just expect slightly higher quality navel gazing than the OP?

I think the marginal case is what’s important though, no? Like law firms are obviously aware that not everyone can jump but if, say, 10% of corporate associates (the ones you want to keep) have the ability to shuffle between banking and law, you have to consider that in setting compensation if you don’t want to lose them.

You don’t have to take my word for it though, here is the New York Times on a wave of salary increases in the 80s:

“Lawyers both inside and outside Cravath say the new pay package was prompted by the fact that some of the best law school graduates -and some of the firm's most promising young associates - have shunned the practice of law and turned instead to investment banking.” (https://www.nytimes.com/1986/04/18/busi ... start.html)

[Anonymous User]

This topic comes up a lot and it never makes any sense.

Biglaw and banking are different job, with different day to day activities, utilizing different skill sets, recruiting from different applicant pools, on different timelines, with different career trajectories, different cultures, and different people want to do them.

Not to beat a dead horse. But, T6 --> banking here

... Which is not uncommon? Law students / lawyers end up in banking (or management consulting) all the time, precisely because there's so much overlap between what these professions look for and demand. Banks have formal recruiting presences at law schools

Obviously that doesn't make this thread any less of an exercise in navel gazing. But what are forums for?

No one ever said it never happens, just that it is uncommon (and certainly not common enough to affect industry-wide compensation, as OP was implying, a few counterexamples here and there notwithstanding), and for those who are making the decision, it is not the overly simplistic argument the OP made where bankers work X% more and make Y% less, so therefore "biglaw compensation is fairly priced at the moment."

We can quibble about the exact number of people who are actively making the decision, but as someone who made the jump, surely you'll agree there are more factors at play when comparing the two than what OP laid out. Can't we just expect slightly higher quality navel gazing than the OP?

I think the marginal case is what’s important though, no? Like law firms are obviously aware that not everyone can jump but if, say, 10% of corporate associates (the ones you want to keep) have the ability to shuffle between banking and law, you have to consider that in setting compensation if you don’t want to lose them.

You don’t have to take my word for it though, here is the New York Times on a wave of salary increases in the 80s:

“Lawyers both inside and outside Cravath say the new pay package was prompted by the fact that some of the best law school graduates -and some of the firm's most promising young associates - have shunned the practice of law and turned instead to investment banking.” (https://www.nytimes.com/1986/04/18/busi ... start.html)

wow, interesting article, thanks for sharing! what was iBanking associates' pay back in 1986? If it was 60,000 (for lawyer after pay increase) versus 120,000 (bankers) back then, that was a huge difference ...