Hi there, im a freshgrad, my career goal is to be an equity research analyst (dont mind buy side or sell side but prefer sell side due to higher bonus and more work challenge (in terms of creating ideas)


So my question is
1) should i stay in the lower tier securities/stockbroking firm? How long / minimum should i stay? Should i go to trainee program instead if i got it? Despite not offering the position i want (equity research)?
2) is lower tier securities firm really looked down upon? How do i grab attention of the big names? I know as a freshgrad i cant offer much, but i would like to join the big names in the future.

Thanks in advance..

This post has been edited by hazelnaz2041: Oct 5 2017, 08:05 PM

If yr wish is to become an equity analyst, of course it would be good to work in an established investment bank, research house or institution investment house.

There's no rule to say how long you should stay in one organisation, whether it's a lower tier or an established one, as long as you continue to have the opportunity to gain exposure to the line you wish to be in.

The longer you work, the more experience you'll gain and that will give you an added advantage to join the big names.

Going for CFA is a good decision imo and it will help you in yr applications once you've obtained the full qualifications.

1) not sure, i read it somewhere on lowyat and someone in the industry told me (but very vague) Ie tier 1 is like cimb and maybank but no way to get in unless u join their mgmt trainee. The firm is *i** securities. Its a standalone stockbroking
2) oh idk i dont really wanna get into ib/exm/cf, just very interested in equity research
3) as explained in 1

Is it? Heard its quite useful if u have it? Does pay differ if u have cfa or not?

Thanks!

I think ur 2:2 qualification kinda hurt you a lot though you graduated from Uni of Warwick. Nevertheless, what done has been done.

For your situation right now and with the employment market in Malaysia currently, I think you should join any company that offer you a role in the career path that you desire, be it tier 1 or 2.

RHB has an accelerated Research analyst role while pays quite well and also has a structured program, maybe you could look more into it. Being a JPA scholar, won't they assign you to a role?

To answer your question:

1) should i stay in the lower tier securities/stockbroking firm? How long / minimum should i stay? Should i go to trainee program instead if i got it? Despite not offering the position i want (equity research)?
It will be tough to enter sell-side as an analyst directly without any experience, and without any connection. Its more realistic if you aim for research assistant positions in the sell-side. Management trainee program works too but its not guaranteed that you will be allocated into equity research. Also its not true that sell-side will always offer higher bonus nowadays as some buy-side can beat them (for example: PMB, Affin Hwang, Etiqa), while the main challenge for a sell-side analyst lies with managing client relationship (not exactly idea creation). Why dont you look to gain some experience in buy-side firms which are hiring fresh grads such as PMB or Capital Dynamics (not recommended)? Its best to stay for at least 2-3 years before moving to next job.

2) is lower tier securities firm really looked down upon? How do i grab attention of the big names? I know as a freshgrad i cant offer much, but i would like to join the big names in the future.
Not at all. Ultimately it boils down to how much experience or knowledge that you have gained, as well as whether you managed to impress the interviewer. Its very important that you build connections in the industry as most of the job openings in the big names are not advertised openly.

Btw, CFA typically does not make any difference to the pay but its definitely an added-advantage.

Yea it does seem so but I guess no time to mourn about it, and learn from my mistakes
The position that I got was actually a research analyst at the small firm. And yeah I was the youngest there/fresh grad.

oh RHB, i have attended one of their assessment centre and didnt pass their quiz/assessment centre O: but its okay. I once read their requirement during the Spring UK graduan fair that they only want first class students. yikes XD
JPA scholars, the policy these days is, we are required to find their own job, as long as it's in malaysia (Talentcorp kerjasama). there is SPA too, but only if you get called.


I actually already got an offer as a sell side equity research analyst at the small tier 2 firm. I see. Do you recommend going to buy side or sell side? (in terms of job prospects in malaysia). I read somewhere they dont get paid as much as sell side but I heard they have a lot more benefits... But someone told me sell side is more interesting too.. so idk :S
Do you think my new position as research analyst in the small firm will be a good one? And thanks for the advice, I'll try to stay for at least 2 years and learn as much as I can.

I see, thanks for the heads up! I'll try to network effectively I was just worried about starting out in less famous/small firm because I read a post in Lowyat that i will get marked as "INFERIOR" among the big players in the industry :S Not sure how true it is. (This was what I was most worried about). I'll try to find the link to the forum/statement if I can later ...

And thanks for letting me know about the CFA pay, we'll see if I want to do it eventually...

Thanks everyone for the comments so far! Sorry for the many questions although it may seem redundant. I'll try my best!

PS: Also sorry for grammar mistakes, was typing in my phone/my english is deteriorating... XD

This post has been edited by hazelnaz2041: Oct 3 2017, 07:59 PM

There is no need to worry about choosing sell/buy side as it's easy and normal to move between both. Just give it a try and see... if you don't like it can always switch to buy-side. "Inferior" firm or not it will not hamper your chance of getting to better place next time. Just remember that the industry is very small (everyone seems to know each other) so your reputation goes a long way.

Work hard and enjoy it while you do!

Thank you! Just curious, are u an equities analyst urself/work in the financial industry?

Yup that's right. Have been working as an equity analyst for five years.

Ah I have a question actually.. I just realised that the industry has a very flat hierarchy, I wonder what determines the salary? (apart from rating from institutional investor and 'years of experience')

For my offer, they gave me rm3k, increase to rm3.5k if i pass module 12 and 19. is this market rate? just curious

thanks so much again for answering my question

This post has been edited by hazelnaz2041: Oct 5 2017, 11:05 AM

Yes the industry has a flat hierarchy as you could stay as a Jr./Sr. Analyst in the sell-side for a very long time and maybe eventually move up to be Head of Research, while for buy-side you can aim to progress to a fund management role. Its still possible to attain salary increase through promotion in job grade even though your position title does not change, and this is largely determined by your performance and experience (as what you have just mentioned).

For a fresh grad RM3k to RM3.5k is reasonable... just dont hesitate to move after two to three years if there is no promotion. I think its possible to double your salary every five years in this industry.

Ah thanks so much!! Also last question (really sorry), what's your opinion on people saying that sell side research has not much value and shrinking these days because of the financial crash 2007 and other common issues.. read a lot about peoples opinion on it in different forums... I was just curious about the prospects about the future in this industry...

Also recently i went to v*****c** (buy side firm) entry level interview, the head was saying stuff tht my "curiousity" and skills (hes seen my financial statement analysis report/stock pitch) is not good enough for this job cos the firm's looking more people with background in maths because they are doing more towards quants kind of equity research, is tht similar to the typical equity research practices/report?
and also I saw someone on linkedin/news talking stuff about macro trading/using data science to create more valuable equity research reports etc? Idk if my questions are rephrased well, but what's your opinion in this? thanks again for your time!! Appreciate it

This post has been edited by hazelnaz2041: Oct 5 2017, 05:17 PM

GLIC prefers their scholarship students or someone with few years of experience. Big4 consulting have smaller market share and focus more on operational consulting similar to Accenture in IT. I don’t see how you can translate that experience to equity analyst. Research house in IB are more relevant if you want sell-side research

Actually more people prefer to be buy-side analyst as you can directly determine the investment strategy. You can look for asset management firms like creador and Khazanah. Sell-side analyst generates report which is shared to the bank clients normally for free, sell-side cannot sell their report directly but different country have different regulations. Pay wise sell-side can earn 20k to 30k depending on experience.

Emm regarding perception of top uni, I think most employer perceived place like Ivy leagues, oxford, lse, Cambridge or NUS as top uni. The rest is mainly good. Not to downplay any university but I am just sharing HR perception especially the big corporations (since that is what you are targeting).

CFA is useful but not necessary to get the job. CFA Level 1 and 2 is general and the final level is mainly portfolio management. Unless you want to be an asset manager, the program is just useful mainly for knowledge purpose. If you want to be in a regulated profession in MYS, its more useful for you to undertake Bank Negara and SC exam module for licensing. Although, CFA does give you some exemptions.

MBA depends on where you graduate from. Anything less than a FT100 MBA is considered a normal MBA which is not that useful in bargaining chip with employers. Most top company hunt for top mba scholars due to the stringent MBA entry requirement set by top schools (the process is equally if not more difficult than top company interview process). You can read this WSJ article published today if you want to: https://www.wsj.com/articles/forget-wall-st...azon-1507114801

If you want high bonus and work challenge, you should consider Corporate Finance, M&A or strategy. There are challenge in research but those 3 I mentioned allows you to jump to MNCs as well.

Your past track records means little to HR if you didn’t do well in interview. The interview process gives the employer opportunity to track your performance in real time whereas your past achievements are achieved in a controlled environment. Working world is mainly unpredictable and chaotic which require different skills-set.

Lastly, if you perform well in a “smaller company”, you can still jump to bigger company. Its all about the work you do and how you do it. Small is just a scale. Try go linkedin and search the professionals you like and see their background. Some can begin from humbler origins. It’s the motivation and drive that progress your career and not just your education.
Hope my opinion helps 

haha no worry. Indeed the industry are not as lucrative as last time due to tighter regulation, but it is still usual to draw 20k to 30k as Topace111 has mentioned (with experience of course). The key question that you should ask yourself is whether you are passionate about equity investment? If you are just looking for lucrative compensation then there are other better opportunities out there. However, if you really like what you are doing then you will find that its easy to generate side-income in the industry... and as your knowledge and capital accumulated, you might find that what you make unofficially will be more than the salary that you are drawing. Just remember to exercise prudence when doing so.

Btw, quant-base/algorithmic trading are indeed on the rise but I view it as a supplement rather than a replacement of traditional fundamental research. In the developing market including Malaysia, an analyst can still provide a lot of value-add just by the virtue of their access to management. Also, are you willing to go back to school and relearn data science/programming/maths? I feel that finance is a much easier course than any of these...

I read in one of the previous thread as well about making more money through illegal means. However, I'm curious what could possibly a researcher do to gain illegal income??

deleted

This post has been edited by hazelnaz2041: Oct 5 2017, 08:05 PM

oh do you mean 20k/30k per month? after 10 yrs experience? or 20 years? For me, money is important to me, as long as I'm not undervalued/my salary is okay among my peers.. I don't know why, I guess because of the name of uni I come from, I feel a bit pressured to be on par with them although knowing that I'm not naturally good at finance like some other people (although a few years ago I thought I was good at maths, I guess I became stupid somehow... :/).

I chose this career path because I think it's the only financial career that I will enjoy (I dont think ill enjoy auditing/corporate banking/dcm/m&a etc). I like analysing about companies, writing about them, meeting people, and going into details. It fits me very well. Which reflects in my stock analysis report that I did very well in uni. I also feel that I will learn a lot and be knowledgeable about many stuff (I like researching and investigating). The exit opportunities also sounds very good, I may be considering going into an Investor Relations role. Or perhaps business development role? What do you mean by side-income? And thank you for the advice...

I see, I guess it's more of the science aspect to it, as qualitative is still important.. I am kinda willing to go back to uni (if someone sponsors me hehe).. I think I might be good at the linear programming/optimisation/calculus kinda maths rather than statistics kinda maths though...

And oh I plan to also save up and invest money in property (buying my own apartment etc). That's why I think money is also important to a certain extent..

This post has been edited by hazelnaz2041: Oct 5 2017, 07:28 PM

I was an equity analyst for ~12 years, last stint at a well-known Swiss bank. Then moved to management/sales role at another Swiss inv bank.

Money is there if you perform i.e. lots and lots of it, to be honest, esp in a foreign firm.

Trouble is, there's not many positions going around, and competition is very stiff. Plus, analysts usually fall flat after 2-3 years due to stress / workload / redundancies etc. It's all about how much drive you have to make it in the long term. Try Linkedin or go direct to the banks / use contacts etc. Experience counts, and you will earn more as your career develops.

Insider trading?

Looking at your posts, it seems that you care too much what other people think about you? And it seems you focus mainly on short-term? Being competitive is a good trait but most fresh grad focuses too much in their first few years and end up affecting their long term. If you want to compare, compare when you are all VP level rather than executive level. Salary and working experience is almost negligible before you reach managerial level.

Interests and passion changes from time to time. What you like now may not be the case when you are doing it for real (Ie: on a daily basis, with expectations, pressure, evaluation from superior,….). Research analyst is a regulated profession. What is the big deal? Error is not tolerated. Meaning you have to check, check, and re-check your report until you satisfy your superior that all facts are accurate. How you derive those facts? You have to churn out data from public and paid sources. Imagine data mining or big data. Seems ok? How about doing it repeatedly for the rest of the year? As the research team is very small (normally 1 floor only) and each researcher is tasked with specific field (IT, plantation, transport, ….), each researcher will only take 1 or 2 assistant the most. Expectations are very high and working late is given.

On the exit route, you have correctly identified investor relations as one possible route. Do you know most investor relations are expected to prepare annual report? That is partly audit/accounting there. If you really want to serious development to earn more money in future, CF, M&A and strategy gives you more mobility as the skills are sought after and you have more career opportunities. Research can earn you big $$$ but if you end up hating the job later, you will have trouble switching jobs as research is considered a specialist role (big $$$ but lesser mobility). Try job street and linkedin and see how many career opportunities for those with 5 to 10 year experience in CF,M&A or strategy compared to research.

I am not bashing research, its just my view that a fresh grad shouldn’t choose a very specialised route until you are familiar what you are getting into.

Macam insider trading/ frontrunner je

Seriously focus on the skillsets rather than number of years experience.

What if you have say 10 years of experience but your skillsets are not up to par and you turn out to be less capable than someone 5 year of experience?

It's ok if money is important to you but make sure you have the skillsets /competency to back it up.

Thank u for giving a critical perspective on this!
I guess its true to a certain extent, but m&a and corporate finance role in an investment bank are really hard to get.
And about exit opportunities, i know a friends sister worked as a buy side analyst at nomura malaysia and then become an investment banker in maybank? I guess what im saying is its possible to shift career because research does financial modellings too.. or are u specifically mentioning the limitaions of sell side?

For me, idk why but management trainee programs gives very limited view as u get rotated to each department which in my opinion is wasting time especially if i know what i want..

I didnt know that investor relation does auditing, but i guess its more about checking, think i might be ok with it. Im quite a perfectionist and detail oriented. Also i think writing, research and communicating is one of my strengths so i always think i should leverage my expertise... plus the perks of the IR job sounds like it overrides the cons...
Plus there is also exit routes to private equity too i heard (altho tough)

Yea i compare myself to people highly because i use it as a benchmark. Or else i will be too comforabke with my life and i dont want that. It's bad in a way, but I can't help it... Do u have any advice? Also, truthfully im not after big money, just good enough to live life comfortably not luxuriously.. PS: I'm quite low maintenance... I also think abt what i want in a career, most other financial career seemed boring to death to me. Like audit/corporate banking/dcm. I like equities specifically because i generally like companies and businesses, industries and the environment interaction. So.. voila..

This post has been edited by hazelnaz2041: Oct 6 2017, 08:40 PM

Ha ha, not really critical, just playing the devil advocate.

Firstly about exit opportunities, nothing is certain and there is no clear formula for career progression. Plenty of people has change career even when they don’t fit exactly. However, I am just highlighting that it won’t be easy if you want to shift to a different career path later on. If you can convince the interviewer, why not? There is always the 1 in a million story. The most difficult part of career shift is perception (ie: what others think of you). For example, imagine you are the CF director and you want to recruit a VP. You have 2 candidates, 1 is experienced in CF and another equally good choice but only experienced in research. From this info only, who will you choose? Priority is always given to the most relevant in hand.

You are mostly right about the management trainee program. Getting absorbed to your department of choice is very difficult especially if you have competition.
Investor relation does not really do auditing but they have to prepare stuffs that matters to the investors such as annual report. Some company merge their IR function with their internal CF or finance. It depends on the size of the company. It’s quite hard to find a pure dedicated IR function unless it’s a really large company.

Your strength now might not be your “perpetual strength”. Especially if you have not been subject to heavy scrutiny, performance evaluation or critical feedback. Btw, most of the fresh executive jobs can quite “non-sexy” especially in the beginning (Ie: data crunching, Photostat, copy & paste,…). Depends on your boss style.

The problem with using friends as benchmark is that this won’t be sustainable in long term. Ever wonder why people just stop caring once they hit mid-management? They don’t have a clear goal for beyond or they lack the drive to move themselves forward. Those with drive and passion will ignore comparison with peers and focus on their own goals (Ie: entrepreneurs). For corporate, some can jump and do exactly what they want on day 1. Some take a longer route while some take a different route. I think research is harder to get in as they don’t need a lot of people whereas corporate finance is always taking in people due to high turnover (same to audit). I am not promoting audit or CF but wish to highlight that these can be the option if you first choice does not materialise. The trend nowadays, people don’t stay long within a single company anyway. Budget 3 to 5 years is a reasonable plan. Staying long within a company is also a problem especially if you don’t get promoted or learn anything new. Interviewer can also ask that.

Hi guys. Thank you so much for sharing. I learnt a lot of info thanks to you guys. Mind if I bump this thread as I have few questions to ask.

Firstly, I am local grad (not UM/USM/UKM). I’ve always wanted to be in the M&A/ECM/DCM/PE team. However due to where I graduated despite the many internship experiences (accumulated 1 yr plus) that I have (Finance, Venture Cap and Startups) plus the stiff competition from overseas grad, I scored no chance at all to break into these space. However recently, I happened to score a chance to break into Equity Research in one of the local banks.

Being a fresh graduate in 2019;

1) I’m trying to manage my expectations. Truth to be told I find myself to worth 4-4.5k of salary due to my internship experiences and my co-curricular (but I’m a second upper, not first class). Hence, how much of a starting salary should I expect in ER as a fresh graduate? I have friends who just started his freshie role in a local PE firms that pays insanely high, and some friends in Management Trainee program that pays in between 4-5k, but since I don’t have friends in ER, its pretty hard for me to manage my expectation. Recently I heard the banks association of malaysia announced there will be an increase of 10-15% of salary to all bank staffs, I wonder how does this affect fresh grads starting salary in ER?

2) I planned to spend 2-3 years in ER, get my CFA and try to break into ECM/DCM/M&A in the same company because due to where I graduated, I think I won’t be able to break it as a fresh graduate. Perhaps it would be easier if I’m already in the same industry/sector. Hence what are my chances to break into these 3 dept as I realized most of the senior analyst (2-3yrs exp) are those with accounting background from accounting firms.

Truly appreciate your sharing. Thank you.

This post has been edited by PoPoBear: Jun 10 2019, 08:33 AM

A thing about starting salary as fresh grad, don't expect and negotiate too much as you don't have much leverage in the first place. If you ask for too high, they will expect more from you and you might suffer in longer term if you cannot deliver. Some PE or management consulting firm pay very high starting salary but can terminate you within 1 week notice if you can't deliver in 3 months. Turnover is very high as the money comes from partners/ investors not the company.

For banks, there are the 2 type of staffs of whether you are under union or not. Investment staffs, manager level and above and certain staffs are not union so those 10% rise not applicable to them. Better check with HR.

For banks don't worry, starting is average but they will reward you if you deliver through promotion and increment. That's why you see high performer tend to stay.

Those 3 dept you mentioned require origination skills such as drafting proposal, financial modeling, project management, strategy, familiarity with regulations and others. ER exposure and CFA does help

I see, thanks a lot for the info! In your opinion, given that I get an offer from sell-side, and subsequently another offer from buy-side. I know for sure that I wanted to be in the sell side as the learning curve is steeper. Hence is it advisable for me to get the sell side to counter offer the buy side’s offer with a better benefits/compensation package? Or does the two doesnt jive (sell side =\ buy side) hence would be really stupid to disclose to sell side employer about buy side offer?

This post has been edited by PoPoBear: Jun 11 2019, 07:27 AM

I can’t comment much on salary negotiation as there are too many variance about.

I am just curious why you think sell-side learning curve is steeper?

Been thinking on this a lot and I think you’re right. My thinking could be biased because most of the peers I’ve approached are from sell-side. All of them says that its best to start at sell side first, learn, and then move to buy side.

Do you mind giving some insights on this? My aim for first 3-4 years:

- Solid foundation on technical skills
- Networking with people in the industry
- Broad view and perspective in micro and macro sectors, MY and regional.
- Being able to move later to Fund Management, M&A, ECM, DCM, PE where I plan to spend another 5-7 years and slowly build my management level roles.

I plan to hustle as much as I can; getting CFA, grind, and many others.

Truly appreciate your input.

I think learning curve depends on the size of your portfolio assigned. Hence, you may have different experience wherever you go (big / small company included). In terms of sell vs buy, most will join sell first then they go buy. There are some transferable skills but the nature of work is a bit different. It’s something like external audit vs internal audit.

You can always set a plan for your career which is good but keep it flexible in case you find better opportunities or it does not fit your preference.

In terms of studying CFA, I always value work experience over professional qualifications (I think most portfolio managers do too). If you think you have good career progression (plenty of job opportunities, meaningful projects, primed for promotion), I will always choose job over study. If you can cope with both, you can always try but don’t over stress yourself.

I would like to concur that employers do value work experience over professional qualifications. Managed to more than doubled my salary in less than 3 years from when I first started out as Research Assistant (now Equity Analyst for 2 years). Grateful that I have passed the 6 figure annual salary mark.

This is even after taking a few tries to pass my CMSRL exams in the 1st year and have just failed my CFA level 1 for the 3rd time. I mainly blame it to the fact that I prioritize my work over my studies for CFA. What really helped me was getting top ranking with clients, having unique insights on my coverage as well as ability to get critical information to help with stocks call.

Not to say that you don’t need CFA. It teaches you the fundamentals in analysing financial statements and how to perform valuations. Learning the syllabus will definitely increase your confidence in your work. So I salute all those whom are able to pass their CFA exams while working. They are a higher level of disciplined breed.

From hereon, I’m just trying to sharpen my skills and gain more knowledge wherever I can as well as continue to build better relationships with market players and hope this would bring me to that RM20-30k level in the future

Equity research analysts are quite lowly paid aren't they? After all, anybody with 80 IQ can do the job. Not to mention the posher skills that Ah Beng don't possess like financial modelling are actually not that useful to get a company's fair value. There is no future for people who research equities.

I don't the pay is low but not as lucrative previously.

There are many factors and it's quite a lengthy discussion. In summary:
1) Law changes: Previously most banks offer research info as part of banking package. Now must separately charge, so most reduce or stop providing already. Their bonus pay is definitely affected.
2) There are many more products than just equity. Bond is more complicated nowadays. Myriads of ETFs (leveraged) and derivatives. You also have alternatives like bitcoin, P2P, nfts, ...etc.
3) Fundamental analysis is part of the many factors that affect pricing. Events like covid and war can easily detail those valuations. Just look at how many analyst have to adjust valuations for glove stocks like top glove and supermax.
4) Competition. With YouTube and telegrams, you have plenty of amateurs, unlicensed and trend pickers that can appeal to certain demographics.

The skills obtained are always useful for other field though.

What is the banking package for? I thought research info is just to generate interest in retailers to push up their stocks?


This post has been edited by Celebrity2022: Mar 22 2022, 05:15 PM

Long version:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/equity-resea...-julien-onillon

In fact, since 1 January 2018, in order to allow greater transparency and to combat the risk of conflicts of interest, the regulator has required fund managers to budget their brokerage fees and research costs separately.

What does this mean?

I thought the article already summarised it quite well. In essence, user must pay for it now. Since the value is subjective, most see little appeal in buying it as it will affect their KPI, Numbers,... Etc.

Previously, it's given for "free" hence client can mask it.

Imagine you start paying for all the pundits tips.

I can say there's no 10% increment for IB folks. Plus for union, the increment usually takes into account any delays in signing of new CA, so it might seem big but some have had no increment for past couple of years while the negotiation is ongoing.

I think research is also a "sunset" part of IB, similar to how equities has been viewed the past couple of years.

The money's in treasury and global markets. Another field that is up and coming would be ESG investing. I think we will soon see crazy levels of pay as we try to grab talents for this.