<p>IB now offers much less job security than it previously did, although it is still an extremely lucrative career path for those who choose to pursue it and succeed in doing so. </p>
<p>Most of the BB’s either have changed or are changing very fundamentally; Citi is considering going entirely commercial, UBS has considered downsizing its IBD, etc. Although Goldman has maintained dealflow, Morgan Stanley – traditionally the second best bank after GS – has not. On average, these firms are slightly smaller than they were before the recession (some exceptions are JP Morgan and the almost-BB Jefferies and Wells Fargo). However, changes such as these are largely due to the fact that IB is procyclical and the economy was recently very weak. Theoretically, when the level of economic activity is renewed, the demand for the services of investment banks should again increase (and, by the same reasoning, decrease during recessions), barring any significant regulation such as the Volcker rule (and this is a GIANT and, actually, very impractical assumption; regulation will definitely increase and interfere with the industry, so it likely is, admittedly, forever changed).</p>
<p>Another source of change has actually come from within the banks themselves. College students have traditionally entered IB in analyst classes, which usually guaranteed 2 or 3 years of employment in IBD, depending on the firm. The firms create these analyst classes and, in so doing, spend significant time and money preparing their new hires for continued work with the firm at the conclusion of their analyst stints. Someone above mentioned that analysts typically leave their firms for business school after their analyst stints, which is partially correct. Business school is one option, with other popular options being promotion within the firm, or a transition to an even more lucrative private equity fund or hedge fund. PE/HF positions are very rare to land after undergrad, and a pedigree that includes work at a top group at a top bank (e.g. GS TMT, MS M&A) and/or a top-7 MBA is often required for entry into either at even the analyst level. PE offers better hours and is typically regarded as more interesting, whereas HF’s have more “leverage” and offer a higher chance of really “making it big”. These are the biggest threat to banks, and wipe out significant portions of banks’ analyst classes that the banks have invested their time and money into. They are in many ways the impetus behind the massive downsizing of analyst classes that has occurred recently at BB’s, which in turn has and will continue to result in both fewer options and less job security for the field of IB. </p>
<p>Hours in IB are indeed long. Although there is variation between firms, with better banks requiring longer hours, hours are bad everywhere. Analysts at most BB’s average between 70 and 85 hours per week, although they frequently top 100 in the weeks leading up to the conclusion of a deal. There are also a few top boutiques that are in some ways more desirable than top BB’s (e.g., Lazard, Evercore, Greenhill, Perella are frequently chosen over GS, MS, JPM) in terms of exposure to deals and exit opportunities, but that can be even more rigorous (Lazard is infamous for a stiff work atmosphere and the occasional 120 hour week).</p>