Jesse, thank you so much for doing this.

>> It is a pleasure to be here, Ethan. Good

to see you. Thanks for having me on.

Let's start with a big question. How do

the big multi-manager hedge funds,

namely Citadel, 72, Balazni, and

Millennium, how do they hire the best

talent possible? What does that process

look like?

>> First word that comes to mind is

rigorous.

So obviously

the name alone um carries a lot of

weight right and the way the industry

kind of fluctuates uh and es and flows

sometimes the name carries more weight

than at other times right I think right

now um you know from from our vantage

point

sometimes the these big names might be

losing out to talent in AI I or

startups uh and what have you, right?

But to answer your question more

directly and how are they attracting

talent?

They offer they offer the best of the

best platforms in all of financial

services and they offer the platform of

the smartest of the smartest, right? And

you know, I think for us from our

perspective, that's one of the that's

one of the elements that makes them

stand out the most. Still, you know, at

this day and age, um the the multistrat

hedge fund industry

is largely populated by the capital

allocated by those four names that you

just mentioned, right? Um, so

they sell themselves because

the pod the pod approach traditionally

works, right? There are there are

huge opportunities uh to own and take

risk and to be on a desk or a pod that

owns and takes a lot of risk. whether

you're supporting that uh desk and pod

or you're owning it yourself as the

decision maker uh or revenue generator.

So, I guess that's my long-winded way of

saying

the way that these organizations, the

way that those those four primarily um

sell themselves is their name and they

have the toughest vetting process in all

of financial services and they

inherently attract the smartest and the

most talented for that reason.

>> Absolutely. And I think

I'm laughing right now in my head

because whenever I watch Ken Griffin

talk, right, and he's there and he's in

front of a lot of students and he loves

to do these. I remember quick side

story, but he gave a talk at LSC and it

was in the UK and it was only for LSC

students. I went to UCL and I actually

snuck into the talk just so I could

watch him in person because I was

curious.

>> Yes.

>> Right. And the thing that he stresses in

every single talk is that at Citadel

they hire the highest caliber of people

possible. And he says that very often.

He says we're a research firm first.

Trading is how we execute that. And

talent is how we implement or talent is

how we come up with the the exceptional

research that we produce. And and I

think that at all the multi-manager

shops, they run this I want to call it

sort of a talent strategy where they get

the best and brightest. They bring them

in and they they have them contribute.

And we're seeing recently the

plenty of articles on the talent war

that's happening. Um whenever I talk to

people in the in the industry, they they

they say it over and over and over

again.

>> And I guess I want to hear some

background. How did that come about? um

and what incentives led to that that war

that's the talent war that's happening

today.

So, you know, I think it's no secret,

right, that those those talent

um or that that talent platform is based

in,

for lack of a better term, the top 10

mentality, right? These types of firms

only are looking for talent from top 10

research universities, top 10 masters

programs, top 10 uh PhD programs

uh in the US and globally, right? So

they're not exclusive in that way, but

it's a general principle that they're

looking for best and brightest on paper

as far as a diploma is concerned, right?

I think additionally

um you know something that we've seen

over the last few years as well uh

especially was and I think if I remember

correctly I think I first heard this

from a client but the um I think the

phrase was you know hedge funds used to

hire

if you were on let's for example let's

say if you were on the Google Maps team

or if you were on the highest performing

rates trading desk at Goldman Sachs. Now

the bar has been raised so much that

they want the individual who invented

Google Maps, right? Or the person the

person who is now spearheading um the

next generation of Google Maps or they

want the head of the rates trading desk.

Right? That's I think that's the

difference. That's that's the direction

uh where the paradigm has shifted on to

to to your earlier point, right? That uh

we're in a a bit of a different

generation even though it's a couple

years that that talent bar is so much

higher and it's so much more competitive

now because these funds are in such a

privileged position to be able to work

exclusively with again that best and

brightest.

>> Yeah. I

It's crazy. And we were talking on the

the right before this call before we

started recording and you mentioned how

much Bali Yazni spends on on recruiting.

I think it was $280 million. Am I

correct?

>> It is. It is. I actually just read that

recently.

>> How did that come about? Like how did

they how did the budget for talent

expand so dramatically? Um, and how is

it like 280 million on a single firm is

it's ridiculous, right?

>> Sure.

>> Yeah. You know, I think

I think if you use if you use the recent

information that a a fund like Basnney

spending $280 million, right? Um, but

just without getting into the specifics

of numbers, if you just use the fact

that these funds are spending a lot on

talent, what's the incentive, right? Um,

I think there are there are a couple

ways that I would think about this

question. And one is from a tech and

tools perspective and another is from a

competitor perspective.

And the third is just generally, you

know, as the way the the the way of the

world, uh, if you liken it to

sports, right? I actually read an

article about this earlier this year

that portfolio managers are signing

contracts like athletes, right? Um,

speaking of Bali, right? I believe they

just uh brought someone on for an $80

million contract, right? That's like a

four-year deal in the major leagues, you

know, but at the same time, $80 million

contracts

weren't happening 10 years ago, or an

$80 million contract, depending on the

skill, uh, in sports might be small

compared to what it is now, right? So,

there's just so much more money. These

funds are so acutely focused on alpha

generation whether it's systematic

approaches and advancing systematic

approaches to um

you know to uh utilizing data science

and and AI again to find that smallest

arbitrage right again the referencing

the pod model right they're hedge funds

so the pod model creates a way for them

to um work off of each other and balance

each other but also generate profits in

a different in a an additional way. So I

think they're largely boosted by

technology

which has just again just kind of

shifted this approach where they're

making so much more money hand over fist

that they can afford

that they can afford these you know this

talent.

A little bit of a sidebar to that point.

Um the candidates at this point in the

uh in the cycle have a little bit more

power than they had previously. Right?

There's uh the the industry used to be

heavily based in loyalty or wanting, you

know, wanting to have your name at the

same place for 10, 15, 20 plus years and

just kind of owning your pod, owning

your portfolio forever. And just a a a

natural shift in the cycle has been the

fact that actually uh the candidates or

the the traders themselves have realized

from their draw downs, right? If they're

not making any money or if they've made

a loss,

in order for them to make any money in

their current role, they have to recoup

that loss and then turn a profit,

>> right?

Whereas all of a sudden in the last

couple years, what's become more

mainstream is

they'll the loyalty is gone, right? I

think the term mercenary, uh I I I might

have read in an article. Um but the

loyalty is is kind of out the window and

the the trader has more power because

they can go to a new firm that's willing

to pay them again that $50 million, $80

million package and start from scratch,

right? start from zero rather than

starting in the negative. Um so that has

also driven up the general price. Right?

If you think about supply and demand

just an economics 101, the candidates

having power has created a leverage for

them that's given them a lot more uh

opportunity to maximize their own value

in this market.

I guess I want to go now deep or what I

I want to explore now

>> what the hedge funds look for from you

specifically cuz you know you were

telling me you place a lot of more

junior tech quants um analysts at within

these pods um and you told me that they

look for people who are exceptional and

I think that's kind of a given but I

want to let's say take the quant

example, right? What specific skills or

traits do they typically screen for? Um,

you know, when they're looking for these

high performance to build up pods and,

you know, get funneled into these pods.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Um I think to to refer to

something that I mentioned a little

earlier,

risktaking and risk appetite and risk

exposure is really important

to a lot of you know I I I guess we can

you know uh stay

um if we if we think about the the big

four hedge funds that you've just

mentioned right the the traditional

multistrats risk risk exposure is really

important um because there will be and

hands-on risk exposure, right? These

these funds are looking for individuals,

let's say they're coming from uh a top

bank, right? It's it's well known that

JP Morgan or Goldman Sachs are feeders

into Millennium and Citadel

uh and the other two as well, obviously.

So, you know, if we if we think about

that,

the funds aren't looking for somebody

who is on a team that

makes suggestions. They want the

individuals. Again, this is kind of how

they separate good from great or great

from the best, right? They're looking

for the individuals who have

systematically calculated and have the

communication skills and the confidence

to walk straight up to the decision

maker, right? That pod owner or the

trader themselves and say, "This is what

this is the conclusion that I've come

to.

This is why. And this is the amount of

risk I think you can take on this

trade." Right? Not just the again to

reiterate, not just the person who's on

the team that might, you know, be at the

table. They want the decision maker on

risk assessment and risk evaluation for

examples, right? And that applies to a

couple different skill sets, right? That

that applies to your risk professionals.

It applies to your quant professionals,

right? Um to keep this keep this

relevant to the host and and what he's

studying.

um those who are comfortable owning and

and taking risk and communicating their

own risk if they're not the actual risk

taker themselves. That's a big one. And

I think

something else you know as I mentioned

is

where do they also stand in the cycle of

utilization of a techen tools right are

they the ones who are using uh these

cutting edge technologies

u or are they the ones who are the

decision makers with these cutting edge

technologies especially if they're

coming from tech right uh we see a lot

of talent out of out of meta

still, you know, out of Microsoft still,

which is interesting, right? Kind of

non-traditional finance into finance,

but it's okay because the technology

still applies and and the um the

impact that they can make is

significant, right? So th those

individuals who are at the forefront of

the development of those programs, the

development of those uh of those

languages and especially in an AI based

world that's what these funds are

looking for those people who who set

themselves apart in that way.

So you mentioned two things you

mentioned propensity to take risks or

actual decision makers and then people

who are at the forefront of deploying

technology. Right? to those two things

>> among among many others.

>> Among many among many

>> but for now

>> of course of course um and so

>> when you're when you're evaluating

candidates how do you working in

recruitment screen for those like what

are you

how do you actually screen for those? I

guess not being fully technical.

>> Yeah. Yeah. That's a great question and

you know happy to happy to uh peel back

the curtain a little bit here. I think

you know for us first and foremost if

you think about what what our titles are

uh I'm referring to the consultants and

the or the I just gave just buried the

lead there. I just g I just gave away

the answer. Um if you refer to what the

people that work at our company, our

recruiters are called they're called

consultants. Right? So what I mean by

that is it is incumbent upon them to

really fundamentally and intrinsically

understand our clients.

So

how do we vet for that? You know anybody

can look good on paper. Anybody can AI

produce a resume. Anybody can inflate

their resume. Anybody can tell a story

that maybe uh is a little bit uh

fabricated if you will, right? But for

us, the best way we go about that is

really, as I say, intrinsically

understanding the client and

understanding how certain pods or

certain groups within these clients

operate so that we can represent them to

the best of our ability, right? Again,

if we know that a certain just to use

this risk example again, right? Um, if

we know that a certain client

is really adamant about somebody who can

communicate and and um

explain confidently them owning and

taking taking the risk, right? We can

vet for that.

>> That's just one example. Tell us about a

time when, right? It's not just what is

your sharp ratio per se.

>> Yeah.

>> Right. It's about we know that this

group specifically

really likes X, Y, and Z.

>> Tell us how you've applied that in your

current role. Right? So that way we're

not just looking at a resume. We're

representing the client's particular

needs and those that line of business's

particular needs.

I want to hear more about the

risk-taking side when you're

interviewing someone

because let's say you want to place

someone who worked at a pod at I'll just

use firms as an example. He worked at a

pod at Citadel and now he wants to move

to another one another one of the big

full-time managers. Um who owns the

track record? So if he says, right, I've

taken on this risk this time, this

particular instance, and I made x amount

of dollars for my pod. Um,

can you say that honestly? Because I

think one of the things I don't

understand that well is the transparency

around who owns the track record.

>> Yeah. Well, you know, I think I think

that depends on exactly who we're

referring to, right? if if the candidate

you're talking about here is the actual

risk owner, right? Um and that's really

what all these pods are about. You know,

Millennium takes pride in um you know,

it's public, right? Um Millennium takes

pride in uh their their risk owners. Um,

so

you know if if that's who's coming to us

then I think we know right there's a

credibility there's a spoke unspoken

credibility in the market that that's

that's who the risk owner is that's you

know if they tell us this is what their

uh you know what their sharp is and what

or what their u track record looks like

then that's what we're presenting to the

client right Um,

if we're just if we're working with

somebody a candidate who's maybe

supported that risk owner either from an

engineering and software development

perspective or a quantitative analysis

perspective,

then that's where we're asking those

types of vetting questions to understand

the performance of the pod, the

performance of the team they're on, and

what exactly are they specifically

owning and doing from a behavioral and

uh day-to-day perspective that that

elaborates what's on their resume.

>> And so

I guess now we've talked a little bit

about the dynamics of actually hiring

the talent um and and what what people

are are looking for. Um I guess now I

want to hear a little bit more about the

broader trends that you see taking place

in the industry. Um yeah, what what do

you what do you see happening on the

ground? what you like we've talked a

little bit about the talent war. I think

that's going to continue. Uh but is

there anything that any trend that you

think is is coming up now that you think

will persist?

Yeah.

So, you know, as I as I mentioned at the

top, right, I I I think one of the

biggest trends is the fact that we've

gone from in the last few years the the

raising of the talent bar, right? We've

gone from them wanting um

excellent members of excellent teams to

the best member on the best team, right?

That's one general talent trend that

we're currently in the middle of. I

think another is geographic.

And

obviously, you know, as you as you

rightly mentioned, uh Ken Griffin, he s

tends to be a harbinger of all things by

side. uh the way Jaime Diamond is the

the way the way Jaime Diamond is the

harbinger of all things banks and

generally financial services. So, you

know, when Ken Griffin moved Citadel

headquarters to Miami,

uh, he obviously wasn't the first person

to put any hedge fund employee in the

state of Florida, but it kind of opened

the floodgates for a talent, not

necessarily exodus, but a talent

migration, let's call it, right? So, you

know, what we've seen is funds like

Citadel are moving to Florida and not

just what was traditionally

technology or engineering for, you know,

these these multistrats, right? I

believe Millennium was as well uh uh in

engineering in Florida uh as well as

some uh analysts or uh middle office

professionals. But at this point, the

risk owners, the risktakers themselves

uh are are migrating to Florida as well,

right? Um and to be honest, I don't

think it's just tax reasons. Although I

think, you know, when you're making

seven, eight, nine figures, uh, not

paying taxes on it is certainly helpful.

But I'd say I'd say that's probably the

other biggest trend that we're seeing in

the in the hedge fund industry right now

is the migration to Florida. Uh, and

then internationally, there's a lot in

Dubai as well. Um we've we've seen quite

a bit of development in the same you

know multistrat fundamental

um fundamental skill set uh risk owners

moving to Dubai as well and oftentimes

those are traders um from banks but as

well as the you know the hedge fund um

uh portfolio managers as well

>> and so what do you think's driving that

because I think New York I live in New

York we both live in New York right Now,

it just seems like it's it's still the

spot, you know? I can't see Dubai

competing. Well, obviously you have the

taxes and maybe that's pretty sweet.

>> The financial capital of the world is

not going to be Dubai or Miami anytime

soon. That's what you're saying.

>> Exactly. Yeah. Exactly. Yeah.

>> Exactly. Ethan, I don't disagree with

you. I think what what has happened

these these types of things um these

types of things happen, right? You know,

if I if I liken this in some sense to

2016, 2017, there was a massive

migration to the Dallas, Texas area. JP

Morgan, again, Jaime Diamond decided

that's where he wants to build JP

Morgan's next uh new headquarters. And

now Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan have

more employees in in Texas than they do

in New York. Doesn't it doesn't mean

that's a fact. It doesn't mean that they

aren't the headquarters or the capital

of the organization, right? New York is

still the capital and the the

headquarters are still in New York. It's

more about the fact that uh even as

these big banks are building campuses

and even as Ken Griffin is investing in

enormous office in Miami, what does that

mean? It means that they're bringing

opportunity to lower cost of living or

lower cost base centers, right? U yes,

Ken Griffin is building a new enormous

building at 350 Park Avenue uh over the

next couple years and Jamie Diamond just

did it in New York, right? But I think

you know what they've done is tax

purposes and cost-saving for the fund uh

or the organization more broadly. And

how do these firms thinking about think

about attracting talent to those

respective locations? I mean, you

mentioned Miami and Dubai.

>> Yeah. Yeah. I mean, that's a great

question, right? like there has to be

some element of a cell, you know, uh

somebody who's been somebody who's been

firmly planted in the Northeast, right,

having to move to a Dallas or somebody

who's been firmly planted in London

moving to Dubai, you know, New York to

Miami. How do they sell it? Um, one way,

and this is fairly matterof fact, one

way is that the only option is to move

to that location. In other words, if you

want if you want this job, this job is

only located in Miami, right? The pod

that we're building or the team that

we're building is located only in Miami.

So,

it depends, right? Because because

working at Citadel is most of the time

somebody's dream job, right? So if they

want their absolute dream job, it just

comes down to how much how willing are

they to move to Miami to do so, right?

Or move to Dubai to do so. Um it's

similarly or maybe differently. Um some

candidates view it as a pit stop, right?

Um, if you think a lot of the Western

traders in Europe who are moving to

Dubai,

they don't plan on settling there

forever, right? It's a few years. It's

kind of like Cristiano Ronaldo, right?

He just signed a massive deal. Um, uh, I

can't remember if it's Saudi Arabia or

or UAE. Yeah.

>> Just signed a massive deal to play

football um for like two years, right,

in the Middle East. He's not going to

he's not going to settle there for the

rest of his life, but for a couple

years, you go play

you go play uh you go play for a couple

years, you go, you know, you go trade

for a couple years, don't pay taxes, uh

and then come back. Those are other ways

that candidates are kind of thinking

about these types of approaches as well.

And on the topic of the way candidates

should think about their approach,

you've been in this space of recruiting

and focused a lot on hedge funds, really

seeing how how their hiring processes

operate.

What What are the cases where you've

seen someone um where they're able to

stick around in the industry and really

thrive versus I guess burning out or

even not even landing a job? like what

have what differentiates people in this

space?

>> That's a that's a good question. You

know, I think intangibly my short answer

is they're just wired differently.

Um,

but you know, there are a lot of there

are a lot of candidates

who work at banks and think that a move

to the hedge to a hedge fund is the

ultimate, you know, the ultimate goal

for them, right? The the way they might

work at a the way banks might be a

feeder to private equity, they might

also be a feeder to hedge funds for

certain candidates. Um but sometimes the

candidates are open to returning to a

bank because of stability or

you know uh hours or things like that.

So my short answer is

they're wired differently.

Again that's a that's a bit of a a

qualitative intangible answer. They're

wired differently. But you know how they

stand out is these are people who are

inherently incessantly driven to break

down barriers, right? I think that's

what probably differentiates

hedge fund talent from other industries,

even other talent in financial services.

They're never satisfied. These are

people literally these are people and

these are organizations

whose existence

is to be

like milliseconds

better than their competitor or you know

the smallest percentage of arbitrage

whether it's time or alpha or what have

you. They're always trying to fine-tune

and look for opportunities

to make

an extra dollar, right? Or or advance a

technical program or an internal

proprietary application, right? To me,

that's what I've found. And again, my

expertise is primarily through my

conversations with clients rather than

it is candidates

generally. So the reason I'm able to

give you this answer is because that's

what our clients look for, right? That's

what our our hedge fund clients look

for. They want people who are driven by

incessant

desire to just continue like being this

much better because that's really what

the hedge fund industry is about.

>> From your conversations with people, do

you think you were able to tell when

someone's going to be a winner in the

space versus not?

>> That's a great question. I don't know if

I'm the best person to answer that to be

honest because I don't speak to

candidates very often

uh if at all anymore.

But I would say if I generally if I'm

answering for my for for my teams here

to be honest I think sometimes right the

more we work with clients the more we

work with u um candidates the more we

understand their teams

I would say sometimes we know you know

we we can we can hang up the phone and

say that's the placement right that

person is just made of it.

Often times and other times really the

client is the one who can sit there and

say they're, you know, they're our

material. So, we do our best, but

ultimately that's that's why we partner

with our with the business development

and talent acquisition teams at our

clients is for them to really help make

those final calls. But we understand

their businesses really well that we can

provide them, you know, that right

talent in the first place.

We've spoken about what makes

exceptional players in the risk-taking

side of things, right? In in let's say

analyst or quant or let's say even for

tech talent.

>> Um

what makes an exceptional business

development guy at a hedge fund? Yeah,

you've recruited you you work with with

with the pod shops. Um, obviously you

can't say specifics on which ones, but

work with big ones, let's just say,

right? Um, what makes someone an

exceptional picker of PMs, of analysts,

of quants? I'd love to hear it.

Another really interesting question

and uh I should probably refer you to a

friend of mine and and former colleague

from Selby Jennings who moved to my uh

moved to Millennium to do this exact job

because he he probably has the exact

answer. uh you're talking to somebody

who stayed on the agency side for the

last [laughter]

so I can try and evaluate my uh my

clients uh from afar.

Again, in short, I think the answer to

that is the the the people who

understand

the client like to the core the best,

right? So let's take any of the big the

you know the four multistrass you just

mentioned right we haven't mentioned 72

yet let's give them some love

the best BD people at 72

could could

speak

Steve could could embody Steve Cohen's

mentality and you know life to a tea

right maybe not his lifestyle per se uh

they know exactly what he is about. They

know exactly what the groups that they

represent are about and they are

freaking experts in their market, right?

So the first things first is they have

to be the best recruiter, right? One of

the best recruiters in the world in

their market, you know? Um that to me

that to me is like the no-brainer

obvious answer because they're in

recruiting at at the world's best. But

other than that, these are people that

represent their clients

absolutely perfectly. And they represent

their clients by knowing everything that

they're about

in a way that also represents the

culture of the client, right? They're

cutthroat when they need to be. They're

um intense. They have a work ethic that

perfectly emulates the style of the

organization that they're from. Right?

So those traits to me are what are what

make them so great at their job. Uh not

to mention they are freaking incredible

salespeople, right? to convince somebody

to leave whatever, you know, deal

package or or um offer package they have

at Meta or another one of the

multistrats or some incredible startup

offering zillions and shares whatever to

convince these individuals to leave

those opportunities to join their fund.

They're also, you know, worldclass

salespeople. Okay. So in summary, you

know, I think their ability

uh to to master their market, to

represent culturally and uh in their

heart the firm that they work at, and to

be excellent salespeople. That's what

makes really strong business development

uh professionals in the in the hedge

fund space.

Jesse, we know each other through our

friend Doug and Doug Garber and um yeah,

I did a podcast with him. I was on the

phone with him. I think it was last week

and I was talking about roles um you

know just talked a bit about quant but

after doing the podcast now I've gotten

really interested in what the business

development side looks like at these

large multistrats you know and I've

gotten really interested because I love

these conversations um I yeah I am very

technical but conversations I found by

doing the podcast I always enter a state

of flow and I love doing it um and

Whenever I speak to a hedge fund

manager, someone who's building out a

new quant fund, they always talk about

how

it was so different from running money

at one of the previous pods cuz they had

to build up so many things from scratch.

Uh, and the skill set required was

completely different. Now, in my mind,

I'm thinking that the ideal team of,

let's say, a startup fund looks like an

exceptional A player BD guy and an

exceptional portfolio guy. Um,

I guess just to throw a pretty wild

question out there, but is there a path

for the BD guys to own some risk or own

like in the form of I guess picking the

PMs and owning a share of that or

starting their own fund? I'm curious.

Uh I will I will caveat my answer with I

am not the eminent

uh uh source of knowledge for this

question. Okay. Um I will I will say

I'll give you my an opinion. Um but I am

certainly not the one who whatever I say

goes for this.

I'll tell you a story.

Um, we were meeting the

head of PM recruiting, you know, head of

business development as it would be

called at uh, one of the four

multistrats that we've been talking

about, right? Uh, this is a couple years

ago. We were meeting with him and talked

for an hour or so and I left the

conversation

and you could have told me that that was

the person who runs

whatever pod at that fund. You could

have told me that that guy was the head

of

rates trading or the head of, you know,

statistical arbitrage at whatever.

I was so impressed with how well, again,

kind of to the point that I just made,

right? I was so impressed at how well he

knew his market and he knew every small

detail around how the traders themselves

think and how they operate

that I could have been convinced that

that was a trader himself.

Having said that, do I think that these

people

um or that do I think that the BD

leaders could themselves own and run

um own and run their own fund or at

least own and run their own book. It's

actually the other way around.

oftentimes former traders go into BD and

go into recruiting because they have the

network, they have the book of business,

they understand it obviously, you know,

uh intrinsically.

So

they become the agents to the industry.

There's actually again another article

from earlier this month or last month.

there's an individual who is launching

his own agency and he's going to make uh

PM placements exclusively

that is a lot more likely than the

inverse somebody who's ahead of BD going

to become a trader again and I'll just

to to short to wrap this up uh give you

a short answer on as to why this is the

case

at the end of the day BD people um I

wouldn't consider myself a hedge fund BD

professional but I work in recruitment

and sales the similar similarly to the

way they do. We're people people people

persons, right? Um so while we

understand our markets and and the pods

that we represent to our core, um we are

not generally speaking, we are not as

analytical, quantitative,

right? We don't necessarily have those

skills that a trader absolutely must

possess in order to succeed in their

role,

right? So I think the the opposite can

happen a lot more often where the

business development professional sorry

where um the portfolio manager can go

into BD or recruiting uh and we see this

outside of hedge funds as well right

some um there's a there's an individual

who runs a small recruitment company of

about 30 40 people who used to be one of

the most senior traders at Bank of

America and decided to go into the

recruiting side of things because of his

network connections. So, it's much more

likely to go that way than it is the

other. Although, they're always really

impressive the way they know their

businesses.

>> No, no. I like I I agree with what

you're saying. And I wasn't thinking

about a BD person running a book, but

you know, next week I'm speaking to

Tyler Ericson. I don't know if you're

familiar with him, but I read an article

on Business Insider. uh and he's

starting a you know a new platform

called Riptide Advisors and they want to

raise you know I think the article cited

$640 million. Tyler being primarily a BD

guy was telling me that the how insanely

valuable that skill set was and how by

having an exceptional skill set in that

domain, he's able to own a big piece of

the pie. And so I guess I'd love to hear

your thoughts on that as a sort of

unconventional

um approach to building up a fund. Um

and it's just a thought experiment

really.

>> Yeah. Well, you know what I what I think

the the key point that you just made

there that I would like to point out is

I think you mentioned he has a finance

background or he's previously run money

in some form, right? Uh so that skill

set exists for him. So now what he's

doing is kind of pairing both, right? So

do I think somebody who might have

started their career in agency

recruitment, excelled at it, went

somewhere else uh inhouse, then became

the best BD professional, you know, out

there uh in the market.

Do I think that person could, you know,

kind of make those decisions that you're

referring to now? I'm not I'm not really

sure. I I don't know if I'm the best

person to uh you know answer that.

So we've spoken a lot about the industry

about what the funds look for and then

now about BD and what the nature of it

as a role and the potential for it. Um,

I guess I'd like to, you know, just

towards towards the end of the episode,

but when you started your career, uh, in

recruiting, were you working, were you

speaking to, I guess, undergraduates and

graduate students who were looking to be

placed into funds?

>> So, I started my career in risk

management.

>> Okay.

>> So, I was placing uh less so students.

We don't really do graduation or

graduate recruitment at at Feden

International. Uh mostly experienced

hire. So you know minimum AVP um VP

level at a bank you know um

executive director uh at a bank as far

as the titles are concerned. That's

where I have spent my career uh for

about three years was placing those

types of professionals into financial

services institutions, banks, startups,

hedge funds, what have you.

And from all your experience of working

with all these different sorts of

people,

>> yeah,

>> what's what are the traits that make for

not just extremely high performance at a

top fund, but

make for a satisfying career, you know,

a great career in general,

you know. I I think first and foremost

people need to be

people need to be motivated and

um

inspired by the work that they're doing,

right? And I think the reason hedge

funds are such a great place for the

talent that qualifies to work there is

because as I mentioned earlier, right,

they're so

in the best way possible, so insanely

driven by small marginal gains and and

an absolute, you know, top or best

performance that people who want who and

think like that, people who who want to

be involved in that type of opportunity

thrive,

you know, they thrive at a hedge fund

because they they operate the same. And

you know from a client side of things

something that we find and we often

consult on and try and offer as well

ways you know if we if we think about it

as a from a retention perspective.

It's also about being able to create

opportunities to find or to create

inspiring work. Right? Um,

oftentimes we'll find, you know,

candidates start to hit the market. Not

not always just out of spite because

they didn't get their bonus or they got

their bonus and now it's time to leave.

But it's usually when time is up, right?

They've they've uh things have gotten

stale in their role or they've been at

the same place for a while and they

haven't really seen the growth that

they're looking for. Um, so you know

what I find in candidates and what

they're what they're for the most part

motivated by is you know opportunities

to do challenging this is why people

want to work in financial services right

we literally Ethan we literally speak to

astrophysicists

right PhDs from Stanford in molecular

biology astrophysics and other eight and

10 syllable words that I can't

pronounce. Okay?

But they want to work in financial

services. Why? Because the problems are

equally challenging. And if you look up

there at the stock ticker, you can see

that it's moving

because of decisions that they've just

made.

Right? So being involved in the global

financial system is far from

insignificant.

Okay? So these people want to be

challenged. They want to be stimulated

and that's generally that's what we find

in the best of the best candidates. You

know, we work with a lot of global

leaders in financial services, banks,

hedge funds, and otherwise insurance.

And that's generally what we find in

like the real, you know, the the best of

the best clients. Um, because they

provide the best of the best

opportunities for the best of the best

candidates

to really challenge themselves and solve

interesting, intricate, complex

problems.

relevant interesting imple in

interesting intricate complex problems.

>> Absolut absolutely and I think that

finance often gets vilified as a you

know all these people are just extremely

greedy and just want money and obviously

money is a nice incentive but you can't

stick around if that's the only thing

going for you.

Not at all. Not at all. Um, you know, I

I uh I say this shamelessly.

It's the West. Capitalism exists. It's

not going anywhere.

And there's no problem with that. Uh

just because you're a capitalist doesn't

mean you're greedy. It means that you

want to work hard and you want to earn

money for working hard. And that's to me

that's what capitalism is. That's why I

live in New York City. I'm a capitalist.

But,

you know, I I I don't think I'm greedy.

I just want to I want to work really

freaking hard and I want to live a life

that I enjoy. And that's, you know,

people who work in financial services.

Um, I agree with you. They're they're

just really interested in solving really

interesting problems.

I love that. And I think that's a that's

a great place to wrap things up. Thanks

a lot, Jesse. I think this conversation

was very very insightful.

>> Thank you so much, Ethan, for having me.

I've really enjoyed this and I hope your

audience uh has been able to glean a

takeaway or two and uh I hope they found

it interesting.

>> Thank you.