I’ve done 2 years of IB and 2 years of PE before law school and I question why made a career switch to being a deal lawyer.
- The job is more cognitively demanding, and you’re always actively reading/writing and splitting hair on what “makes sense”. In contrast I could crush putting together a financial model or PPT while listening to music and let my brain go on autopilot.
- A lot of my critical thinking tasks in IB/buyside was about trying to cast sufficient doubt over assumptions or making sense of a company’s debt stack, which all had a pattern and you could do reasonably well with some repetition. In a merger agreement you can debate over virtually anything
- The job is more hierarchical and demands more precision. In IB/PE I did a lot of “goal seek the IRR to 18% by fudging the SG&A build” sort of things.
- Billable hours suck. I worked 10-2am in IB but a lot of it was downtime and reading Matt Levine, talk sports, etc.
- Lawyers generally suck. A lot of “introvert yet needlessly confrontational” types.
A few things I appreciate about this job, though:
- You really understand how the sausage is made and get a fulsome view of what parties really care about in a transaction.
- It’s much more meritocratic than finance and feels “fair” — it’s clear when someone is truly good at his job and that person usually goes very far. Your career as a result isn’t so dependent on your background or how your organization does (relatively speaking!)
- The pay is in all cash, all the time.