I don’t have a strong view, sorry. I usually only look at bank rankings by sector when writing or updating one of these industry-specific articles, and I haven’t looked at tech/TMT in a few years. Rothschild is a good firm overall, though definitely stronger in Europe/EMEA.

For PE, probably about the same. For corp dev, Bank of America is better because it’s more widely recognized outside the finance industry. So on balance, I would probably pick BoA. Lazard might be better for banking long-term.

Yes, potentially, but you usually need some kind of pre-MBA internship or other business-related experience to have the best shot. Otherwise, you’re up against too many former bankers and people with more relevant finance experience. The FAANG brand helps for sure, but you’re still going to be perceived as a career changer.

I don’t think it matters that much, but you do benefit from being in certain groups for certain exit opportunities. For example, recruiters are always going to approach people in groups like GS TMT and MS M&A for the top PE roles first. But if you want to stay in banking, this point doesn’t matter, and you should just pick whichever group you like. I don’t think you can really be a generalist forever, though, as senior bankers are all in specific groups, so you’ll have to decide on something eventually.

On the topic of IB groups, do you have a view on the generalist experience versus working in specific industry groups? Or even working with a specific set of senior bankers versus working with a broader mix?

I understand that there are pros and cons to each, and that experiences will differ across banks and people. Thanks!

We don’t do rankings here. You can find recent league tables in source like the one below:

https://www.globaldata.com/jp-morgan-leads-globaldatas-top-10-global-ma-financial-advisers-league-table-in-ict-sector-in-2019/