eFinancialCareersEnglish (UK) – eFinancialCareers

Today’s students aren’t supposed to be that interested in pay. Something, though, must be driving hundreds of thousands of students to apply for jobs at places like Goldman Sachs and money surely has something to do with it. Investment banks pay graduate joiners more than any other industry.

So says a new report by student research company High Fliers. As shown in the chart below, average graduate starting salaries in banking are now £47k. This is 57% higher than in media, and it doesn’t even include the end of year bonus.

The bad news is that while banking still pays inordinately well, it’s almost certainly become harder to get into. High Fliers says investment banks’ graduate recruitment fell by 38% between 2007 and 2017 and that vacancies in 2018 are likely to fall by 6% compared to last year.

High Fliers based its investment banking research on interviews with Barclays Deutsche Bank, Goldman Sachs, HSBC, Morgan Stanley, RBS and UBS.

Follow @MadameButcher
Have a confidential story, tip, or comment you’d like to share? Contact: sbutcher@efinancialcareers.com
Bear with us if you leave a comment at the bottom of this article: all our comments are moderated by human beings. Sometimes these humans might be asleep, or away from their desks, so it may take a while for your comment to appear. Eventually it will – unless it’s offensive or libelous (in which case it won’t.)

““

Now more than ever business leaders have to make decisions in dynamic and unpredictable environments, whether that’s committing to a new technology, launching a new product, or responding to the aggressive actions of competitors. Making the right decision is essential – it could be costly to turn the wheel back.

A new elective offered on Imperial’s Executive MBA teaches Strategy in Volatile and Uncertain Environments – so instead of simply throwing a dice, leaders can learn how to turn the odds to their favour and effectively manage their bets.

We talk to Dr Jan Ross who teaches the elective across MBA programmes at Imperial College Business School about the uncertainties facing businesses today, and how business leaders can employ strategy, rather than rely only on their finance teams to manage volatile and uncertain business environments.

What uncertainties are facing businesses today?

Well, I guess the first type of uncertainty that many businesses in the UK are currently facing is Brexit uncertainty. But beyond that we also see many companies that don’t know if their latest product will still be viable in a few months due to speedy technological progress. Other sectors face frequently shifting consumer tastes – products that are popular now may well be out of fashion in a couple of months and company investment is at stake. Yet other businesses are also facing a lot of competitive uncertainty from escalating rivalry, such as the recent intensifying competition between Google and Amazon.

To make things even more complex, for many companies different dimensions of environmental dynamism (i.e., competitive rivalry, technological change, and sudden shifts in customer preferences) come into play at the same time. Sometimes it seems like chess: company leaders are expected to predict and think about all the different strategic moves possible. But in uncertain times the rules of the game are rarely defined (or at least frequently changing), the payoffs are not clear in forecasting, and the number of players on the chess field suddenly increases. I hope that this elective will help students to make better decisions in the VUCA (volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous) environment they operate in.

What do students learn on the Strategy in Volatile and Uncertain Environments elective?

A range of topics are covered on the elective. First, we will look at different types of conditions that firms are facing.We’ll cover some terms students might have had experience with from their day-to-day business, such as the VUCA framework, and learn what these mean for strategic management.

We’ll then look at how to manage downside risk and how to benefit from the upsides of uncertain environments. There are many companies that are actually doing quite well despite dynamic and uncertain environments, take Google and Amazon for example.

Next is the competitive landscape. Students know that competition can be fierce in many emerging and established industries. We will look at different strategies they can develop to outcompete their rivals in dynamic competitive environments. Finally, it’s also important to look at dangerous pitfalls of strategic-decision making in such environments that can lead to worse outcomes than before.

Can students reflect on their experiences in the classroom?

I hope students will bring in many examples from experiences and the decisions they’ve been making in their companies. It could also be a personal decision, for example, the decision to invest in an MBA. Beyond the students’ own experiences, we will take a look at a range of case studies and examples from the business press to enrich the discussion and widen the scope of topics. By debating over these topics, students will be prepared for future decision-making, and learn tools and methods for how to approach them.

Do students glimpse your research on the elective?

Yes. That’s the benefit of studying at Imperial College Business School because we are a research-led business school. My teaching incorporates the research I’m doing on the topic and, because it’s my research expertise with relevance for today’s business leaders, I’m extremely passionate about it.

Does the elective have business application immediately?

I have taught this topic on other programmes and workshops. During one of our graduations, a student told me that the content gave his team the approach they needed to convince venture capitalists to invest in their start-up – I was extremely happy to hear it and felt that this is the kind of impact you are working for as a lecturer! The elective has certainly immediate application to business leaders in the classroom who are currently facing uncertainty and must make decisions.

Further links:

It’s early days. So far, comparatively few banks have announced their bonuses for 2017 and there are mixed reports at those that have. One thing is certain though: the U.S. banks announcing their bonuses now will be more generous than the Europeans that announce later.

So far, the most is known about bonuses at Morgan Stanley and Citi. Morgan Stanley announced last week and Citi announced yesterday. J.P. Morgan is understood to be announcing today, with Goldman Sachs announcing over the next few days and Bank of America announcing early next week.

The news is generally held to be good in investment banking divisions (IBD), where the bonus pools at Morgan Stanley and Citi are held to have been up around 8% and 9% respectively. This hasn’t come as a big surprise: at Citi, revenues across IBD (M&A, ECM and DCM) were up 20% last year. In equity capital markets (ECM) in particular, Citi’s 2017 revenues were up 68%. “People in M&A are quietly happy. Bonuses have been in line with expectations and I haven’t had the usual rush of calls from upset people,” says one M&A headhunter, speaking off the record. “It’s all been pretty positive,” agrees a capital markets headhunter, adding the caveat that while overall bonuses are up there are still people who’ve been paid 30% to 40% down. “It’s increasingly performance driven,” he says. “I’ve seen an MD at Morgan Stanley on $2m and another in the same area on $800k. And we’re still seeing bonuses reallocated from MDs to vice presidents and associates, which is where most of the hiring is.”

While IBD bankers are generally happy, the same can’t be said for people in fixed income. Here, the story is more mixed. Morgan Stanley has yet to report its full year results for 2017 (they’re out this Thursday), but in the first nine months of the year, fixed income sales and trading revenues at the bank were flat on 2016 while rival U.S banks were significantly down. After several years of poor bonuses, this created an expectation that Morgan Stanley would finally pay-up. It doesn’t seem to have done so.

“People are happy-ish at Morgan Stanley, but in my opinion they’re still paying a lot less than other banks – particularly when you look at what people have been given at Citi,” says one macro headhunter, speaking on condition of anonymity. “A lot of people at Morgan Stanley did well in terms of revenues and were expecting to be paid up, but were paid flat,” claims another fixed income headhunter. “Pay was up slightly at credit desks on Morgan Stanley, but it was still pretty tight,” a credit headhunter says. The head of a London fixed income search boutique says Morgan Stanley’s fixed income business has been paid well, but that this is only, “relative to bad pay last year and for the previous few years.” Another headhunter says some salepeople at Morgan Stanley have been zeroed.

It’s at Citi, then, that fixed income bonuses seem to have been best so far, particularly in trading. “Traders at Citi seem to have been paid well,” says one fixed income headhunter. – “Salespeople less so.” What does Citi’s high pay look like? “There are traders at Citi who got 7% of their P&L,” he says.

In equities, headhunters say Citi has paid up despite its mysterious $130m loss from a “single client event”. “The best people there are being 15% more than last year,” says one equities headhunter. “The senior people in Citi’s equities business are conscious that people could leave for Morgan Stanley or J.P. Morgan.” At Morgan Stanley, equities bonuses are understood to be up anything from 0% to 10% with rare individuals up 20%.

The big question now is what happens to pay at J.P.M and Goldman Sachs. J.P. Morgan is said to have “carefully managed expectations.” At Goldman, there are said to be fears that all last year’s hiring has eaten into the bonus pool and that existing staff will suffer as a result.”

““

You can’t say that Goldman Sachs didn’t see this coming. Back in 2012, CEO Lloyd Blankfein was talking about the need to invest in technology and electronic trading, to move into credit trading, and to prepare for a world in which revenues are persistently lower. So, what went wrong?

Today’s fixed income trading results from Goldman are nothing short of abysmal. If co-head of securities trading Pablo Salame was “tired of losing” before, he’s going to be exhausted now: after a 50% year-on-year reduction in the fourth quarter, revenues in Goldman’s fixed income trading division were less than half those at J.P. Morgan and Citi, and just 60% Bank of America’s. Goldman’s fixed income trading powerhouse is shriveling. To those who left the firm in the past few years, it’s a travesty.

“The alumni are angry,” says one former Goldman partner from the fixed income business. “The value of the FICC reputation is deteriorating by the quarter.”

Goldman has a detailed plan for rehabilitating its fixed income business, as articulated by co-COO Harvey Schwartz last year. However, the ex-partner says Schwarz’s plan to increase Goldman’s corporate client list and to build relationships with asset managers and banks misses the point: he says Goldman’s issues are symptomatic of internal politics. Historically, Goldman was a collusive place to work, but as revenues deteriorate he claims the firm is turning in on itself. The decision to double external hiring and bring in new senior blood from outside risks worsening the problem in 2018.

“The senior and mid-level people in FICC at Goldman today spend 99% of their time managing their upward images instead of their client reputations,” says the partner. “No one is focused on trading. No one is focused on covering clients. It’s all about survival. They tell their bosses they’re covering clients, but they’re spending more time covering their backs – the senior people are busy putting together Powerpoint presentations for Lloyd and five year plans for the board.

“All the adults have left the FICC business at Goldman,” he adds, pointing to the roster of big names who left in 2015 and 2016. “This is a global problem – you see it London, you see it in New York. Goldman has become all about self-preservation. The senior people are just hanging on for one more bonus, one more vest.”

What’s the solution? He says senior management needs a clear-out. Veteran analyst Dick Bove has long been arguing that Lloyd Blankfein needs to move on. The ex-partner says the rout should be deeper than that: “Clean out the FICC house and start again,” he says. “You need to get rid of the lifers – if someone stole your wallet in 2008, would you trust them in 2018?”

Last year, the New York Times said the battle for the helm of Goldman Sachs is being enacted between co-COOs Harvey Schwartz and David Solomon. The ex-partner is clearly a fan of the latter: “Harvey is about as steeped in FICC trading as you can get,” he says. 2018 may see Solomon succeed: Goldman’s investment bank performed well last year.

In the meantime, someone at GS is going to suffer: spending on compensation in the fourth quarter, often an indication of bonus accruals, fell 32% on the previous year.

““

Wall Street banks are competing with other sectors for top-notch technologists, and that competition for data scientists, computer engineers, programmers, product managers, designers and other information technology (IT) professionals is driving salaries higher.

Hedge funds are paying up for data scientists in particular. There have long been reports of people making $500k plus per year, but Matt Stabile, the data science and engineering manager at recruitment firm Averity says there’s renewed interest in mid-level hires making $150k-$200k who “won’t break the bank.”

Recruitment firm Robert Walters says banks are hiking tech pay to keep up with the buy-side. Compensation range for software developers/algorithm coders can range from $100k to $1m, according to Peter Wagner, managing director at recruitment firm Affinity North who previously worked at Morgan Stanley and Lehman Brothers. Wagner says there’s currently big demand for people well-versed in JavaScript and related frameworks such as AngularJS and React, plus Python. Fintech firms are interested in Scala. Low latency firms are interested in Kdb+. This is where pay is increasing.

Mike La Rosa, the director of financial services at Twenty Recruitment Group, says sell-side salaries range from $100k for junior tech pros and rise to around $175k. They’re often topped up by bonuses of up to 50%. Buy-side programmers typically earn $150k at the top end with equal or higher bonus potential. If you’re looking for pay hikes, La Rosa says the in-demand roles include quality assurance (QA)/software engineers with open-source automation testing experience (Selenium WD for web-based automation testing and Appium or Espresso for mobile automation). People with cloud automation expertise are also popular (Amazon Web Services, Google Cloud or Microsoft Azure), as are site reliability engineers and data scientists.

La Rosa cites a few examples of candidates who recently received higher-than-expected offers. They include a data scientist at multi-strategy hedge fund; an engineer at a high-frequency trading firm; a mid-level web developer at brokerage house with knowledge of JavaScript, React.js, Redux, Angular2, Ext.js, HTML and CSS; a VP-level QA manager focused on data-driven automation frameworks and continuous integration using Jenkins; and a DevOps engineer.

“Comp continues to increase as financial services firms compete in a small pool of candidates,” La Rosa says.

Follow @danbutchrwrites

Have a confidential story, tip, or comment you’d like to share? Contact: dbutcher@efinancialcareers.com
Bear with us if you leave a comment at the bottom of this article: all our comments are moderated by actual human beings. Sometimes these humans might be asleep, or away from their desks, so it may take a while for your comment to appear. Eventually it will – unless it’s offensive or libelous (in which case it won’t).

Photo credit: gilaxia/GettyImages
““

What do you during your downtime if you’re a 55 year-old Goldman Sachs banker with a house on the upper west side and a salary (before bonus) of $1.85m a year? Let David Solomon, co-COO of Goldman Sachs be your guide.

Firstly you have parties. Solomon is reportedly one for hosting soirees for his “varied social network”, including his wife’s dog walking friends. Secondly, you eat out at fancy restaurants “more than some food critics,” and even invest in your favourite eateries. Thirdly, you fly around the world being an international DJ at clubs in the Bahamas (possibly unpaid). Fourthly, you get yourself a house in the Hamptons. And lastly, you invest in some of the finest wines known to man and a domestic assistant to transport them about for you.

This final spending habit has got Solomon into a spot of bother. In an episode reminiscent of Joyti DeLaurey, the Goldman secretary who stole millions from managing director Scott Mead (now a fine art photographer) in 2005, Solomon says he has been frisked by his 40 year-old personal assistant, Nicolas De Meyer, whom he says robbed him of wine worth $1.2m whilst taking it to his house in East Hampton. The wines De Meyer stands accused of pilfering include seven bottles from Domaine de la Romanée-Conti worth a combined $134k. It’s not clear whether – like Mead – Solomon didn’t even notice the disappearance of some of his wealth for a while, but the fact that the thefts continued over a two year period suggest he has more on his mind than the state of his wine cellar.

Separately, after all the rumblings about Barclays making redundancies, it seems they’re actually happening. Bloomberg reports that Barclays is making 100 layoffs at director and managing director in London and New York.

Meanwhile:

Stefan Hoops, head of Deutsche’s capital market division in Germany, told reporters: “Not thousands will move from London, but rather hundreds…the lion’s share of traders will remain in London.” (Sky)

Kathryn McLeland is running a newly combined treasury and investor relations unit at Barclays, making her one of the most important women in British banking. (Bloomberg)

MifID II is here and Evercore has closed its equities execution desk. (Financial News)

UBS is using artificial intelligence to manage its travel spend. (Computer Weekly)

David Einhorn’s hedge fund rose by…1.6% last year. (NYPost)

The former head of FX trading operations at Barclays in NY stands accused of orchestrating a multi-million front-running scheme.(The Trade News)

Consolidation comes to High Frequency Trading as Hudson River acquires Sun Trading. (The Trade News)

Goldman’s bankers outperformed its traders for the first time since 2000. (Bloomberg)

““

One of London’s leading financial regulation lawyers has a problem. His client, a major European bank, has been contemplating moving trading jobs to continental Europe in preparation for Brexit. But the spouse of one of the key members of the team doesn’t want to go. Neither, therefore, does her husband. The bank wants to keep hold of the husband and is therefore being forced to rethink. “This couple want to stay in London, and the bank will do anything it can to keep them,” he says, speaking on condition of anonymity.

This isn’t an isolated case. While bankers with European nationalities are often keen to return to their home countries, senior non-European bankers, especially Americans, are wedded to London. Lloyd Blankfein admitted as much in November when he said Goldman was opening offices in Frankfurt and Paris because American bankers prefer Paris to Frankfurt. For some, it’s London or nothing. “My wife doesn’t want to leave London and will insist I change jobs if we’re compelled to go,” one U.S. banker told us last year. Before yesterday’s revelation that Deutsche Bank will be shifting hundreds rather than thousands of staff to Frankfurt because of Brexit, Deutsche CEO John Cryan said, “bankers, technology experts and traders work in London and they want to stay there.”

This recalcitrance highlights the extent to which banks remain hostage to top staff. In an era where banks have supposedly become utilities where success is about the power of the franchise rather than the individual, individuals still hold a lot of sway. UBS acknowledged this when it asked its bankers where they want to live after Brexit. The results have yet to emerge, although UBS has also indicated that job moves out of London are likely to be less than first anticipated.

Of course, the impetus to stay in the UK may be related to more than just the availability of schooling and an established community. Yesterday’s statement by Stefan Hoops, head of Deutsche’s capital markets division in Germany to the effect that legal and support staff will moved to Frankfurt along with trade booking facilities, while the actual traders will remain in London, suggests Deutsche has espoused the views of pro-Brexit lawyers like Barnaby Reynolds. They say that “back to back” trading, where trades are made in London but booked in the EU, will be perfectly possible after Brexit has taken place.

The regulatory lawyer suggests an additional explanation. “There’s been a change of sentiment recently on the basis that it seems there will soon be some sort of transition arrangement in place,” he tells us. “Firms are under less pressure to sort things out before March next year.”

On this basis, he suggests banks are simply being pragmatic: why upset your key staff by preemptively insisting they move to Europe when it may not be necessary. In Frankfurt, meanwhile, most of the finance hiring right now is for the middle and back office, but local recruiters are confident this will change soon. “For the moment banks are just preparing a minimum set-up here,” says Tim Zühlke, partner at Frankfurt-based Fred Executive Search. “No one knows what will happen after Brexit actually takes place, but I suspect will see some recruitment in the front office this summer.”

““

If you’re an ambitious student, you’re probably interested in a career in banking or consulting – or both. If it’s the latter, you need to be aware of the differences in the CVs that will get you a job.

You’ll need to emphasise your academic achievements

In both industries, you’re going to need academics. In consulting, you might also need an MBA. In finance, you might need a finance-related degree.

Make sure your qualifications are prominent. Be exact about the courses, grades and universities you have attended. Include any particularly high grades, prizes, scholarships, awards or relevant project commendations. Every applicant will have an excellent degree: look for other academic achievements to differentiate yourself.

Use your skills and experience to showcase traits that are specific to each industry

Internships are arguably more important in investment banking (as bankers recruit extensively from their summer internship schemes). But consulting recruiters will still be looking for industry knowledge, gained in work experience or intern roles.

Both sectors look for strong analytical, problem solving and communications skills. However, there is more emphasis on critical thinking and the ability to present, influence and persuade in consulting than in banking. This is because you are likely to be client-facing from an early stage in your consulting career. Banks, on the other hand, often need strong quant skills, a good knowledge of financial modelling, number crunching and advanced Excel skills.

Consultancy tends to have a less hierarchical and more informal atmosphere than banking. Even as a junior consultant you will be expected to socialise, network and build relationships with clients. You will often be dealing with companies in trouble or undergoing difficult transformations and you will need to demonstrate an ability to handle pressure and solve problems diplomatically.

You will also be required to travel extensively and collaborate with clients from different cultures and backgrounds. International experience, languages and interests that showcase your stamina will all be viewed favourably by recruiters.

Banking is competitive and the work delivered to clients needs to be of an exceptional standard. The long hours culture is still prominent. Attention to detail, diligence and stamina are important. However, as a junior banker you are likely to be office-based creating financial models in Excel and pitch books in PowerPoint. Client presentations and travel assignments tend to kick in at a more senior level.

With this in mind, refocus your achievements to emphasise the desired competencies of each industry.

Craft a personal statement

The personal statement at the start of the CV is your opportunity to highlight your suitability for either banking or consulting.

If you’re writing a banking CV, this is your chance to write about your experience as a trader – either virtual or real, your passion for financial blogging, or what you learned running the university’s investment club. If you’re applying for a consulting firm, this is where you can impress with your competitive debating skills or history organizing multifaceted projects such as an arts festival or fund-raising initiative.

Use bullet points throughout and be clear about what you achieved

For both industries, add bullet points to the body of your CV and use these to provide information of the tangible achievements you highlighted in your personal statement. Be succinct and specific. Talk about the value you added, the changes you overcame.

Be brief

In both banking and consulting, all of this must occupy no more than one page. Avoid spelling mistakes and grammatical errors: these are elite industries. Make sure your italics and spacing are consistent.

Good luck!

Victoria McLean is the founder and CEO of City CV, a London-based CV writing service. She was previously a recruiter at Goldman Sachs and the equities division of Bank of America Merrill Lynch.

““

Maybe Goldman Sachs didn’t do so badly after all? A day after Goldman reported a 50% year-on-year drop in fixed income trading revenues in the fourth quarter, Morgan Stanley’s just done much the same and for much the same reasons (falling revenues in rates and FX, a difficult comparable quarter). While Goldman’s been lambasted for its failings, however, Morgan Stanley is keen to let it be known that everything’s ok.

During today’s investor call, Morgan Stanley CEO James Gorman said the bank remains unperturbed by its fixed income sales and trading revenues of $808m in the fourth quarter (down from $1.5bn the previous year): the bank’s aim is to average $1bn in fixed income revenues per quarter, said Gorman. Bad quarters are offset by good and Morgan Stanley’s overall business is sufficiently diversified to handle it. “We do believe there will be volatility in this business quarter to quarter,” confirmed Morgan Stanley CEO Jonathan Pruzen. “In a better market backdrop we would expect to participate in the recover. We have the capacity to do that.”

Nonetheless, collapsing revenues in fixed income trading took their toll on profits at Morgan Stanley’s Institutional Securities Group (its investment bank). Net income across ICG fell 60% year-on-year in fourth quarter, to just 8% of revenues, down from 24% in the fourth quarter of 2016. In normal circumstances, cost-cutting might ensue, but at Morgan Stanley this doesn’t appear to be the case. Instead, Gorman today actively praised Ted Pick, the sweary trader who runs the bank’s fixed income business for doing a “phenomenal job.” In other words, fixed income traders are still in the bank’s good books.

Gorman also took the opportunity to allude to the dangers of joining expansionary European banks (think Barclays) on Wall Street. While competition from European banks is certainly increasing, Gorman said many are “national champions” with a history of expanding in the U.S. only to retreat again later. Last year, Barclays poached one of Morgan Stanley’s most senior quants in New York, for example. “From time to time they [European banks] expand out of their home market, but over time that gets washed out,” he says. The implication is that while European banks on Wall Street may hire you at a premium today, their jobs may disappear tomorrow.

Asked if Morgan Stanley proposes to invest in its Institutional Clients Group anywhere, Gorman said Asia remains a point of focus for “organic growth” potential. Yesterday, Goldman Sachs reported a 4% year-on-year reduction in its fourth quarter Asian revenues.

““

Outsourced trading has been around since the early 1990s, but since that time it’s grown significantly. More small-to-mid-sized asset management firms are looking to “right-size” their business, that is, save money by cutting in-house traders (or not hiring any in the first place) and relying on a third-party outsourced trading firm. That keeps traders up at night.

While many veteran traders see outsourced trading as a curse that jeopardizes their job security, Jeff LeVeen Jr., a managing director and the head of outsourced trading at JonesTrading, counters that it’s actually a blessing, as its growth is opening up career opportunities – he hires buy-side traders to staff his group.

“For [buy-side] firms launching with $25m-to-$200m in AUM, there are only so many people they can afford to hire internally – if you’re launching with $200m, you probably need a COO and several analysts, which creates salary pressure in an environment of lower management fees,” LeVeen says. “For an average trader, you’re going to spend a couple hundred thousand dollars of comp to get him or her in the door, and you have to put a Bloomberg Terminal and an order management system, so each trader is easily going to cost at least $400k or $500k per year.”

LeVeen began his career as an institutional sales-trader at Salomon Smith Barney and was with the firm for eight years, during which time Citi and later Morgan Stanley acquired it. LeVeen then worked for nine years at KCG (since acquired by Virtu Financial), rising to MD before joining JonesTrading in 2014.

“We’re not an electronic block-crossing firm – we’re a human-driven agency-only block-trading firm, executing trades for hedge funds and mutual funds, including emerging managers,” LeVeen says. “With the growth of outsourced trading, I have heard the comment that the traditional buy-side trader feels threatened by the number of outsourced firms winning the trading business of emerging managers.

“I understand their side of the equation – if there was one outsourced trading firm 20 years ago and today all of a sudden you have 15 firms doing it and more managers running their trading via an outsourced service provider, it’s obviously a threat to them, [but] 90% of our employees are traders who cover institutional asset management clients, mainly firms looking to downsize and streamline expenses,” he says. “We’re not making calls to say, ‘I think you should outsource your trading and get rid of traders.’”

Often a firm will outsource trading for the first 14 months, get up to a billion or so in AUM and they decide they want to hire a very senior buy-side trader from a competitor, LeVeen says.

“In those cases, we created a stable job opportunity to for a buy-side trader, as it’s less risky to make that move 14 months in,” he says. “Also, outsourced trading firms are hiring many ex-buy-side traders to expand their teams.”

Buy-side traders are the most appealing pool of candidates that JonesTrading looks to hire.

“We’re hiring good-quality buy-side traders that wanted to come over to the sell side, maintain contacts with the PMs and buy-side analysts and traders they used to work with and now cover them from the sell side,” LeVeen says. “They have training interacting with PMs and they understand their daily asks.

“To the buy-side traders concerned by outsourced trading and how it will impact their career opportunities, a sell-side outsourced trading platform will probably pay those traders better,” he said. “On the other hand, it’s risky for someone signing on to become the head trader at a big long-short manager, because that long-term seat is dependent on that one firm’s results.

“Working at an outsourced trading firm and trading on behalf of three or four managers offers diversity and a bit more stability than joining a new launch.”
Follow @danbutchrwrites

Photo credit: Dimitri Otis/GettyImages
““

So you made a mistake or breached protocol and your previous Wall Street employer considers you a bad leaver. If there’s bad blood between you, then you’re unlikely to get a good reference and find a new job is not going to be easy. This doesn’t mean, however, that it will be impossible. You just need to follow these rules.

Repair broken professional relationships

If you left your previous firm on less-than-ideal terms, it’s natural to want to stick it to your former employer. Many people have burned bridges, only to regret their behavior later. As big as the industry is, it’s not big enough that you won’t ever come into contact with former bosses and colleagues.

“Begin working on repairing that relationship,” said Laurie Thompson, a principal at Heidrick & Struggles. “Let a couple months go by and reach out to meet for coffee.”

Explain the reason –even if you made a serious mistake

Be open about the reason you were let go – after all, it will come to light at some stage. If it was just one job, it may not matter. “If you’ve been let go from the past four jobs, it might be a problem, but otherwise it shouldn’t be,” said Reshma Ketkar, a director at Glocap.

Don’t lie and say something like “The bonus was disappointing so I quit” if that wasn’t the case. Beating around the bush and being evasive is likely to exacerbate the issue, which will probably come to light regardless.

“If you know this former manager may speak unfavorably about you or not give you a glowing recommendation, say, ‘Here are the things that they didn’t like and here are the things I did well,’” said Rebecca Dappen, managing partner at Lucas Group. “Be honest.

“Talk about what you learned in the process, and why you would not do it again,” she said. “If something bad happened that you did, you have to own it, because it’s going to come out eventually, and then you’ll sound suspect, so put it out there yourself.”

If you’re upfront with them and disclose a past indiscretion, misstep or issue, then they are more likely to process it the fuller context of your candidacy, rather than see it as a deal-breaker.

Also, be honest with yourself. Is this a pattern that has cropped up repeatedly during your career?

Fine-tune the messaging

Spend some time writing down your key talking points related to your exit. Then craft the messaging around why you left together with your former line manager or HR. Even if you’re not on great terms anymore, often the ex-employer will realize that’s in their best interests too.

“The key is to communicate a consistent and honest message about why you left,” Thompson said.

It’s OK to say, “It was the totally wrong job for me. However, this one is a perfect fit for me, because…”

Find good references

An employer will not request references until the end of the recruitment process, when the team has met you and liked you, so you should be able to generate some goodwill by that point.

Provide the contact information for former colleagues who are more senior to you and are likely to give you a positive reference. Most managers don’t want to badmouth former employees, Ketkar said.

“If they ask specifically to speak to your most recent boss, it’s probably not going to be a slam, but you have to tell your soon-to-be employer what happened,” Ketkar said. “That said, there has to be somebody who you worked with at that organization who would speak positively about you, so put that person forward as a reference first.”

Don’t dis former bosses

You don’t want to blame others for the situation or be disparaging, because that’s a red flag for hiring managers.

“Even there’s bad blood between you and your previous employer, it’s important to demonstrate introspection and explain what happened in a professional manner – ‘We had a difference of opinion over how to lead the team or investment strategy,” Thompson said. “If it was a personality conflict, say ‘Here’s what I learned, here’s what I would do differently and here’s what I’ll take with me,’ which demonstrates perspective and maturity.”

Don’t apologize

While it is important to be honest, you don’t have to reveal every single gory detail of your split with your former employer. Being overly apologetic is more likely to hurt than help you.

“Come clean and say ‘Here’s what I learned,’ rather than say ‘I’m sorry’ or blame them,” Dappen said. “Don’t try to dance around the badness; say, ‘Here’s the mistake I made, here’s what happened, but if you give me a shot I can assure you it’ll never happen again, and here are the steps that I will take.’”
Follow @danbutchrwrites

Photo credit: BananaStock/Thinkstock
““

Last time we looked at Tudor Capital’s operation in Europe, it had been hiring and the London office seemed to have escaped promised redundancies after persistent investor withdrawals. Six months on, and a partner who joined after working for J.P. Morgan has left.

A filing with Companies House shows that Nick Munns, a former Tudor Partner, left the fund on December 31st. His exit is confirmed by the Financial Conduct Authority Register.

A macro-focused portfolio manager, Munns joined Tudor from Omni Partners, where he co-managed the macro fund, in August 2014. Prior to Omni, he spent three years at J.P. Morgan and two years at RBS.

Munns’ exit comes as Tudor decided to shutter a discretionary macro fund in December 2017 due to poor returns. It’s not clear whether Munns worked on this fund. or decided to leave of his own accord. Andrew Bound and Aadarsh Malde, the London-based co-chief investment officers on the discretionary macro fund, left shortly after its closure was announced.

Hedge funds as a whole had an excellent 2017, with the average fund producing returns of 8.5%. Macro funds, however, managed returns of just 2.5% last year. “It has been a frustrating several years for macro trading and for me especially,” Tudor founder, Paul Tudor Jones, wrote in a letter to clients in December. “But I believe the environment is on the verge of a significant change.”

“”

After years in the doldrums, pay for back-office banking staff in Singapore is on the up again – and the increases are unexpectedly high.

We looked through the new Singapore salary survey from recruiters Robert Walters to find out how 2018 base salaries (we averaged out the low and high pay marks) compare with 2017 across more than 50 financial services jobs. The vast majority of job functions – from compliance to credit risk – have suffered stagnating pay year-on-year in Singapore, but operations roles are a significant exception.

The table below reveals percentage salary hikes for back-office professionals working in 12 different fields within Singapore financial services. Aside from private banking, they have all enjoyed inflation-beating rises. While the table contains AVP-level figures only, the Robert Walters data in the analyst/associate and VP/director ranges shows a similar upward trend.

This is a big turnaround. After establishing itself as an operations hub for global banks like Credit Suisse and Barclays before the financial crisis, Singapore then fell victim to continued offshoring as the same firms moved roles to lower-cost markets, in particular India. Back-office pay rises were subdued for at least the last five years because of a surplus of candidates in the wake of the relocations.

Over the past 12 months, however, offshoring has tapered off as banks have begun to reach their desired headcount levels in Singapore (jobs that face the front-office, clients or regulators have typically stayed in the city state). At the same time, previously unemployed operations professionals have gradually moved into other positions, such as internal audit, and are no longer flooding the job market.

“This means that the operations people who are left in the country are now more valued by the banks, so demand for them has recently gone up, and so have their salaries,” says Singapore-based Farida Charania, group CEO of search firm Nastrac Group.

Singapore’s largest banking employers – DBS, OCBC, UOB, Citi and Standard Chartered chief among them – are doing most of the operations recruitment, although much of it is to replace staff who leave, not to add new headcount.

Where can you get the best pay rises in the Singapore back office? As a rule, they are in the sectors where ops salaries have been weak until recently (e.g. securities and commodities) and have therefore increased from a lower base.

Toward the bottom of our table, you’ll find fields in which demand for talent has stayed strong even through the offshoring boom, including specialists in data, change management and client onboarding. Salaries were already comparatively high for these professionals a year ago, so they had less scope to get large increases in 2018. Support staff within Singapore’s buoyant private banking sector have long been sought after and average pay for them didn’t inch up this year.

The survey data suggests that salaries are evening out across the back office as previously poorly-paid functions catch up with the likes of private banking. While last year the gap between the worst-paid and best-paid operations job was $35k ($93k vs $128k), now it’s just $8k ($125k vs $133k).

Follow @simonmortlock

Image credit: golero, Getty

J.P. Morgan posted a record adjusted profit of $26.5bn for 2017, and the bank is rewarding its top executives with hefty pay raises. CEO Jamie Dimon got $29.5m in total compensation, up 5.4% from 2016, and Daniel Pinto, the head of investment banking, got an 11% raise all the way up to $21m, according to Bloomberg.

While it’s unclear whether these big compensation increases for J.P. Morgan executives extend down the ranks, maybe J.P. Morgan’s rank-and-file can expect a bump up in pay too, especially bankers in areas like ECM and DCM, where revenues rose by double digits on a percentage basis last year.

What about Dimon’s other deputies, you ask? They also received raises: Gordon Smith, head of consumer banking, earned $20m, a 5.3% increase; Mary Callahan Erdoes, CEO of asset management, got $19.5m, a 2.6% raise; Marianne Lake, CFO, received $13.5m, an 8% increase; and Doug Petno, head of commercial banking, earned $12m, a 9.1% increase.

Separately, to date equities trading jobs have been impacted negatively by the rise of automated/algorithmic/electronic trading while fixed-income trading jobs have been relatively unscathed. However, Goldman Sachs CFO Marty Chavez says all of that is about to change.

That message came across Chavez, a former Silicon Valley startup founder, issued that warning to bond traders during a conference call for Goldman’s fourth-quarter and year-end results. He’s spearheaded a spending push to analyze how traders, salespeople and support personnel work – and automating many of those processes.

Wall Street has been debating how far computers can push into fixed income for a while now. Corporate credit in particular has been the most resistant to electronic trading. However, Chavez has taken on this challenge of automating trading in credit, applying insights gleaned from equities trading to fixed income.

“Historically you would often hear people say, ‘Well, all this works great for equities or homogeneous products’,” including currencies, Chavez said on the earnings call. However, he believes that increased computing power means that automated trading algorithms “can handle that extra complexity.”

In the second half of 2017, Goldman hired senior sales staff, coverage bankers and technologists in an attempt to boost revenues in its struggling fixed income, currencies, commodities (FICC) business. That hiring spree needs to pay off, otherwise the technologists might be the only ones whose jobs are safe.