by Brian DeChesare Comments (16)

The Equity Research Analyst Career Path: The Best Escape from a Ph.D. Program, or a Pathway into the Abyss?

Equity Research Analyst Career Guide
“Equity Research Analyst” might be one of the most confusing jobs to describe:

  • “Analyst” is a vague job title that could refer to anyone from entry-level hires in the back office to senior professionals leading teams and managing relationships.
  • “Equity” seemingly has 5,192 different meanings depending on the context.
  • There are different levels within the Analyst role, and the job also differs based on the company type (bank vs. dedicated research firm vs. hedge fund vs. asset management firm).
  • And “Research” itself is a vague term… since all knowledge workers do some amount of research in their jobs.

Here, we’re referring to the Equity Research Analyst role at investment banks and dedicated research boutiques that produce and sell their own equity research reports.

This division is often labeled “sell-side research,” and we’ve covered it in the articles on equity research recruiting, equity research careers, equity research internships, and the equity research associate role.

We’ll pick up the coverage here and move straight to the top of the ladder:

The Equity Research Analyst Job Description

Unlike in investment banking and private equity, where the Analyst is at the bottom of the hierarchy, the Analyst sits at the top in research.

The Analyst’s job is to manage relationships with the companies they cover and the institutional investors that might be interested in those companies.

The division is known for its equity research reports, but Analysts add value mostly by setting up meetings, making introductions, and giving investors new perspectives or information they hadn’t considered.

For many decades, Analysts did this and gave away research for free to encourage institutional investors to trade with their bank, indirectly generating commissions.

Now, with MiFID II in place in Europe, institutional clients pay directly for research, so the role generates revenue more directly (or fails to do so if the clients don’t pay).

Banks in other regions can still use the old business model and give away research for free to generate trading commissions, but these new rules are likely to spread worldwide.

If you look at the main tasks in the research division:

  1. Speaking with market participants (management teams and investors).
  2. Doing industry research (e.g., collecting data on market share, pricing, etc.).
  3. Writing the reports (both short, update reports and longer thought pieces).
  4. Building models and valuations.
  5. Determining market sentiment.

Analysts spend most of their time on tasks #1 and #5 – building relationships and generating market insights – and little time on writing reports, building models, or collecting data.

A Day in the Life of an Equity Research Analyst

To illustrate the differences between the Associate and Analyst roles, we’ll walk through a day in the life from the perspective of an Analyst.

Note that this is a “normal day,” i.e., not one during earnings season or an important conference:

7 AM – 8 AM: Arrive at the office, read the news, and look at emails from traders and salespeople asking about a few companies in your coverage universe.

You also start reviewing a few research notes written by your two junior Associates. The numbers look fine, but the commentary is too confusing.

8 AM – 10 AM: You communicate your changes to the Associates when they arrive, and then you ask one of them to research a new digital media company in the healthcare vertical that you might want to add to the coverage universe.

The market opens, but there haven’t been any big corporate announcements or other dramatic happenings, so things are calm as you review your calendar for the day.

10 AM – 12 PM: You take several calls from institutional investor clients: one from a hedge fund Analyst at a mid-sized firm, one from a Portfolio Manager at a large asset management firm, and one from a PM at a start-up hedge fund investing in the TMT sector.

They’re all looking for insights into companies’ earnings announcements in a few weeks; a few also want to meet with the management teams of software and internet companies you cover.

12 PM – 2 PM: You head out to lunch on the other side of town to meet with the CEO and CFO of a newly public Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) company in the consumer retail vertical.

They have solid growth and cash flow numbers and want more institutional attention, so you try to explain investor skepticism toward anything retail-related (well, except for Amazon).

But you agree to make their case to a few institutional clients who have invested in the sector before.

2 PM – 3 PM: On your way over to meet with another company, you take a call in the car from an Associate PM at a growth-oriented hedge fund.

He wants to do a deep dive into one SaaS company’s “true” churn rate because he doubts the official numbers released by management.

You don’t have all the numbers in front of you, so you give vague responses and then refer him to one of your Associates to get more detail.

3 PM – 5 PM: You arrive at the other company: a digital marketing agency and online advertising platform with ~200 employees that is looking to go public in the next few years.

You explain that they’ll need much higher revenue (closer to ~$100 million rather than their current $20 million) to get there and that they’ll need to downplay the “agency” part and focus on the tech platform.

They claim that they have a new technology that will use “AI” to automate client onboarding and campaign setup, but they’re evasive about the details.

You’re quite skeptical, but if this company somehow goes public, it might be worth adding to your coverage. You also make a note to ask around about the feasibility of this technology.

5 PM – 7 PM: Head back to the office and review what the Associates have been working on all day, including a few new notes, updated models, and an Initiating Coverage Report.

You make some edits and then strategize with the one Associate about the super-persistent Associate PM who kept asking for the “real churn numbers” for that one company.

The firm is a good client, but this one guy is so demanding that you’re reconsidering the relationship. You head home after this.

11 PM: As you’re about to go to sleep, an activist hedge fund announces that it has taken a 5% stake in one of the companies in your coverage universe: a security software company.

These types of late-night / last-minute announcements are not common, but they do happen.

You’ll need to have an immediate view in the morning, so you ask your Associate to prepare a few thoughts and come in early so you can send out a short note before the markets open at 9:30 AM.

Why Become an Equity Research Analyst?

The equity research industry as a whole is not in great shape, with falling compensation, headcount reductions, and MiFID II forcing an unbundling of research.

And hardly anyone “interviews for” an Analyst role in equity research – you have to work there for a few years and win promotions up to that level.

So, if you break in as an Equity Research Associate, why would you want to stay in the field long enough to reach the Analyst level?

The short answer is, “there probably isn’t a good reason to do so,” but I like to be fair and balanced, so here’s a quick list of the pros and cons:


  1. Interesting Work and Solid Pay… for Now – Senior ER Analysts can earn in the mid-six-figures up to the $1 million range, and the work is arguably more interesting and less stressful than what Managing Directors in investment banking All signs point to falling pay, though, so who knows if this will last.
  2. Potential Exit Opportunities – You’re not quite as “trapped” as, say, a mid-level banker who quits and doesn’t have many other options. You could move to buy-side research roles, go into sales, join a normal company, or go into investor relations at companies or fundraising on the buy-side.
  3. It’s a Good “Escape Route” from Other Fields – Especially if you have something like an M.D. or Ph.D. in a highly technical field, equity research might allow you to use your expertise to move into plenty of other roles (though you don’t need to reach the Analyst level to do this).


  1. The Industry is Declining – It’s still possible to make money and advance in a declining industry, but it’s more difficult than it is an industry where headcounts and revenue are growing. Also, no one knows how MiFID II and passive investing will play out long-term; the impact could be anything from “neutral to slightly negative” to “apocalypse now.”
  2. It’s a Huge Grind to Reach the Analyst Level – You’ll have to make it through many, many, many earnings seasons and model/research updates to make it to the top. This process can get quite repetitive, especially if you’re covering an industry less prone to surprises (e.g., not tech or healthcare).

Equity Research Analyst Salary & Lifestyle

There are several different levels within the “Analyst” title, ranging from Vice President (VP) to Managing Director (MD).

At the low end, VP-level Analysts might earn around the $200K to $300K USD salary range at large banks in major financial centers.

Directors move up to the $300K to $600K range, and MDs go up to the $500K to $1 million range.

Around 50% of this compensation comes in the form of base salary, and it’s up to 75% at the lower levels.

These figures will almost certainly fall due to MiFID II and declining research budgets at buy-side firms, but you could still earn into the mid-six figures for the foreseeable future.

As you saw in the day-in-the-life account above, Analysts might work the same amount as Associates: 50-70 hours per week, with ~12-hour days on average, and longer hours during earnings season.

The key difference is that Analysts must travel a lot more, including client visits, conferences, and company meetings.

That means it’s arguably a more stressful job since they also have to review work from the Associates and give them direction.

Recruiting: Pathways into the Equity Research Analyst Role

The Analyst role is a senior one, so you don’t interview for it right out of undergrad or an MBA program.

Most often, people start at the Associate level out of undergrad or a Master’s in Finance program, stay for a few years, and then advance up to the Analyst level… if there’s an opening.

Traditionally, it has been quite difficult to move up by staying at the same bank because Senior Analysts rarely left their jobs voluntarily.

So, research professionals often moved around to different banks and advanced with each move.

Advancing to the Analyst level comes down to proving that you can do the same job that they do: speaking with clients and management teams, delivering insights, and setting up meetings – as opposed to burying yourself in models and reports all day.

Besides this path, some people move into equity research from strategy or management consulting, Big 4 firms, or even corporate finance roles.

However, they join at the Associate level unless they’re already quite senior in their previous industry.

Another option is to complete an advanced degree, such as an M.D. or a Ph.D. in a technical field (physics, engineering, biology, etc.), and then work in a group where technical knowledge is required to understand companies (biotech, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, etc.).

But once again, you’re unlikely to join directly at the Analyst level, so you’ll have to demonstrate your accounting/finance/business knowledge to get there and then perform well on the job to advance.

For more on these points, see the article on equity research recruiting.

The Equity Research Analyst Job: Worth the Grind or the Career Change?

In these articles, I usually conclude with an “It depends”-type answer and present both sides.

But I’ll be more definitive here: a long-term career in equity research is probably not worth it in the 2020s unless you truly love it and can’t imagine doing anything else.

Research is still a great entry point into finance because of the lack of a standard, on-cycle hiring process, and the ability to break in as a non-traditional candidate.

But there’s serious skepticism about its long-term future, and I can’t credibly recommend it as an option on-par with careers in investment banking, private equity, or venture capital.

People are also pessimistic about the future of sales & trading, but there’s a key difference: there are still opportunities there if you’re a programmer or you work with more mathematically complex products.

By contrast, there’s less room for programming or advanced math in the fundamental analysis of companies, and the negative trends in equity research affect the industry as a whole – not just specific desks or groups.

So, the Equity Research Analyst job may not be “a pathway into the abyss,” but it’s also not a career I would recommend – unless you’re so enthusiastic about research that you couldn’t imagine doing anything else.

Want more?

You might be interested in:

About the Author

Brian DeChesare is the Founder of Mergers & Inquisitions and Breaking Into Wall Street. In his spare time, he enjoys lifting weights, running, traveling, obsessively watching TV shows, and defeating Sauron.

Break Into Investment Banking

Free Exclusive Report: 57-page guide with the action plan you need to break into investment banking - how to tell your story, network, craft a winning resume, and dominate your interviews

We respect your privacy. Please refer to our full privacy policy.


Read below or Add a comment

  1. curious to know your thought on ER now? Im an undergrad studying history but am looking at internships in the ER sector for next summer in London. I have already completed a few virtual internships but am now looking to expand my experience in the financial world. Any advice would be appreciated.

    1. I don’t think much has changed. Compensation might be a little different now, but ER is still not a great long-term career path due to MiFID II, falling numbers of boutiques, and lower fees paid for research. It’s still a decent starting option, but you normally want to move into a deal-based role or a buy-side role after spending a few years there.

  2. Now that this report is 2 years old, curious to hear your thoughts on the outlook for ER. It appears that comp in the U.S. has remained the same since before. Do you think that the effects of MiFid II already been “priced in”? Or will comp begin to fall gradually from here on out?

    1. I would be surprised if compensation increases substantially. It’s true that MiFID II has not been the end of the world, but the impacts on ER groups and firms has been uneven, with some growing and some shrinking. It’s probably less bad than initially feared, but still not a great industry outlook.

  3. Snowball in Hell

    I’ve been reading a lot on here for the last couple weeks (love it!) and gotten really interested in Equity Research. Thing is, I’m a 35 year old woman living in Zürich with a humanities PhD leaving the academy. What I read about this career suits me to the core, but I don’t want to invest time in learning modelling and other skills if my apps will be rejected out of hand because of my humanities background. Spent 5 years as a postdoc and realised the academy is not for me, but I got my PhD from an Ivy, if that helps. Do I have any chance of getting into ER? I don’t mind the pay or the shrinking prospects. I love the idea of doing crazy amounts of research and finding things people missed, or just packaging the information so other people can get it.

    1. I think it will be extremely difficult to get into ER if you have a humanities PhD and you’ve worked in academia up until this point. PhDs in technical fields like physics, engineering, chemistry/biology, etc., can get in, but it’s much tougher to do that from a non-technical field. You might have better luck aiming for an investor relations role or something else where communication skills are valued more than technical/accounting/finance knowledge.

  4. Can you chime on the prospect of a career as buyside research analyst? For both equity and credit research. I’m relatively junior but have always worried about things you laid out on this article.

    1. I think buy-side research is somewhat safer because MiFID II does not directly affect firms in a negative way, and buy-side firms will always need people to do fundamental research. Yes, fee compression hurts, but that is just one headwind vs. multiple headwinds for equity research.

      I would also say that credit research, especially in areas like high-yield or distressed, is probably safer than equity research because it’s tricky to evaluate those types of bonds, and fixed income has seen less automation / passive investing than equities (yes, there are lots of bond index funds and ETFs, but most are investment-grade).

  5. Saying to avoid it may be a little harsh. Maybe compared to IB/PE, sure, upside comp is more limited. But a job where you can work 50 hours a week and make mid 6 figures still sounds a lot better than most jobs in the corporate world. If you are a good enough associate and stick around long enough you are bound to have an open analyst seat to fill.

    1. That’s fair enough. Though I think 50 hours a week is a bit on the low side, and I expect compensation to drop over time. I guess my thinking is that if you really want better hours, less stress, low-to-mid-six-figure compensation, and more stability, something like corporate development is better… assuming you want to work on deals. If you just want to follow companies, sure, maybe equity research is still a good option.

  6. What about the overall future of Asset Management? Is it wise to pursue a career in Asset Management?

    1. I think it’s also not great, but not necessarily “to be avoided” as equity research is because there’s no MiFID II that completely changes their business model. Yes, fee compression and passive investing have hurt AMs, but passive investing could turn into a giant bubble that bursts at some point, and there will always be some demand for active managers. Also, quant-like skills will become more important there. For more, please see:

      1. I’m curious, is there anywhere in the public equities realm (excluding quant roles) that you would outright recommend to someone starting today?

        1. OK, maybe I’m being a little harsh here. It’s not that I would universally recommend against public markets / public equities roles. It’s more that if you can’t decide between deal-based roles and public markets ones, then you’re safer picking a deal-based role because they’ve held up better over time and are under less fee and headcount pressure.

          That said, if you are 100% certain you want to do public markets and have the track record and experience, go ahead.

          Within public equities, if you exclude quant roles, Analyst roles at any of the big long-only funds are still fine. It’s just that they don’t hire that many people and turnover isn’t that high, so it’s harder to win these roles.

          As always, the more specialized you can be, the better… find a niche like emerging market stocks or a specific industry or sub-industry and become the top expert there.

          1. For the record, I wasn’t trying to be critical of your view. It just feels like every discussion of roles in the public equities realm nowadays is very defeatist. As someone that missed the track for private investing (at least until an MBA at a minimum), it gets a bit heavy to read continuously that your career path is in decline. So I was just curious if there was anywhere that you still viewed positively.

            I agree with both views on the LO seats, hard to get and not going anywhere. I would also say that if you don’t mind investing in a very short term, market neutral style, that the multi-manager opportunity set is still quite robust.

          2. Sure, understood. I would not take all of these predictions of doom too seriously – everyone out there, including me, looks at recent history and then tries to project it forward. But things can always change, and industries have gone from positive to negative or the reverse fairly quickly. Just look at all the people who thought investment banking would “die” after the 2008-2009 period, or everyone who thought tech startups would “never come back” after the dot-com crash, etc.

            If you like what you’re doing and don’t want to change paths, sure, continue on with it. And yes, multi-manager funds can be a good option as well if you like that style of trading. We did cover MM funds on this site once, but haven’t focused on it too much since I prefer long-term, fundamental analysis/investing.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *