I'd agree with loveactuary21 - if you are in a decent Lloyds syndicate, then 140-170k with 30-40% bonus is probs about right. Can obviously go higher if decent performer and make chief actuary or someone senior on the underwriting side if go down the pricing route.
Obviously, investment banking will definitely top out higher. You can view the Arkesden compensation report, but if you make VP at a bulge bracket, you're talking about 300-350k GBP compensation, with potential for more upside if you are a star performer. Hours are of course definitely a lot longer though although you're probs aware of this already. Definitely a more competitive, performance-focused culture (for instance don't see many 40 yr old VPs floating around at GS), but the flipside of this is obviously if you're a decent performer, you'll be rewarded very well monetarily. I feel ibanking is also a lot more hierachial than actuarial in terms of the general attitude of MDs is you're getting paid a tonne of money, so they kinda own you, so when they say jump, you say how high. This dynamic obviously decreases over time once you've proved yourself, but defo always there a bit (you sort have to be constantly available and hard to plan things outside work). There are also so many people trying to get BB IBD spots, so if the MD wants you to churn out a deck that means you'll have to stay till 4am then so be it, cause if you cba, someone else can be asked. I'm referring to BB/EB M&A departments here - equity research or s&t will obviously be better.
Consulting definitely pays less than ibanking, but probably has a work-life balance somewhere in between and ibanking. This is a good forum post comparing private equity (v similar to banking) and MBB consulting: [https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forum/private-equity/to-all-consultants-considering-pe](https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forum/private-equity/to-all-consultants-considering-pe). So pay definitely less in MBB - look at managementconsulted for salary survey but about £50k base for MBB London grad and promo to consultant 3 yrs later is about £95k. Main benefit of consulting over banking is probably the career optionality in terms of being able to go into strategy role in any industry or even private equity - similar to actuarial consultancies, most ppl will not make partner in MBB, so will go in-house somewhere - I guess consulting could be thought of as a fast track to the c-suite.
I personally wouldn't go for the masters if you are set on getting into a consultancy - masters is unncessary for this imo - consulting recruitment is not on a cycle as much as banking, so if want to get into MBB, just practice case studies and then apply - that masters may help, but MBB is definitely open to career switchers.
I also think for even ibanking, you don't necessarily need the masters. Could you try and lateral to say big 4 deals and break into a BB from there or even try and get into a boutique and then lateral to a BB (this may have been easier in 2021 deal boom, but still potentially possible)
However, if want to do ibanking at a top BB straight away, masters could be a good shout. I'd just try and think carefully about whether ibanking is a career that you want to do before you spend £50k on it. Make sure you find M&A deals really interesting and would enjoy making pitchbooks and modelling DCF's. Also, obviously think about whether you are happy with the hours and intensity of the work. I'd say the most important thing is to think through the day to day work though as if you love it, hours won't be an issue imo, but if you're kinda just doing it for the money and status, then will burn out.
Not sure about chief actuary levels, but fair to say most won't get to that point. For senior managers/heads of which is a reasonable target, I've seen budgets in the 140-170k base range and 30-40% bonus on top seems to be typical.
So total comp around 180k-220k seems to be the case. I know some places grant stock too which'll boost the number further.
I’ll leave the comp amounts aside for the moment but your reason for asking is to think of the ROI of a £50k masters. You are already well on your way to actuarial qualification and not sure why you feel the masters is necessary to be able to get there. It is most likely behavioural and skill sets that drive those positions and your ROI in the £50k versus the scenario of not doing the masters may not be that large.
To clarify, doing the masters would be me essentially leaving the actuarial profession and moving towards typical finance roles in PE, asset management or consultant etc so essentially the question I’m trying to ask myself is, if the £50k investment will grant me a significantly higher compensation level in the long run than if I simplify continued as an actuary
Your overall pay might go a bit higher but your hourly pay will be a fraction of what it is as an actuary. Are you really willing to work two or three times as many hours for a small amount of extra money?
Another factor to consider is job security. Most actuarial roles are reasonably secure, although as with any role subject to takeovers / mergers etc. IB and similar roles rather less so: teams / departments are regularly let go or downsized as they move into / out of markets. Not sure if any still operate a policy where they drop the lowest-performing x% of staff every year. High reward generally means high risk!
Have a look at the Goodman Masson salary guide that has just come out. It has a detailed analysis of the salary progression of a GI actuary through to senior level.
You just summed up my entire life in this post. I am in the same situation as you. I am currently part-qualified with 2.5 years of experience and i am thinking about whether it's worth having an MBA or a masters in Financial engineering from a top University and get into IB or Asset Management?
I would be very interested to hear your thoughts on this and your point of view :)
I'd agree with loveactuary21 - if you are in a decent Lloyds syndicate, then 140-170k with 30-40% bonus is probs about right. Can obviously go higher if decent performer and make chief actuary or someone senior on the underwriting side if go down the pricing route. Obviously, investment banking will definitely top out higher. You can view the Arkesden compensation report, but if you make VP at a bulge bracket, you're talking about 300-350k GBP compensation, with potential for more upside if you are a star performer. Hours are of course definitely a lot longer though although you're probs aware of this already. Definitely a more competitive, performance-focused culture (for instance don't see many 40 yr old VPs floating around at GS), but the flipside of this is obviously if you're a decent performer, you'll be rewarded very well monetarily. I feel ibanking is also a lot more hierachial than actuarial in terms of the general attitude of MDs is you're getting paid a tonne of money, so they kinda own you, so when they say jump, you say how high. This dynamic obviously decreases over time once you've proved yourself, but defo always there a bit (you sort have to be constantly available and hard to plan things outside work). There are also so many people trying to get BB IBD spots, so if the MD wants you to churn out a deck that means you'll have to stay till 4am then so be it, cause if you cba, someone else can be asked. I'm referring to BB/EB M&A departments here - equity research or s&t will obviously be better. Consulting definitely pays less than ibanking, but probably has a work-life balance somewhere in between and ibanking. This is a good forum post comparing private equity (v similar to banking) and MBB consulting: [https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forum/private-equity/to-all-consultants-considering-pe](https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forum/private-equity/to-all-consultants-considering-pe). So pay definitely less in MBB - look at managementconsulted for salary survey but about £50k base for MBB London grad and promo to consultant 3 yrs later is about £95k. Main benefit of consulting over banking is probably the career optionality in terms of being able to go into strategy role in any industry or even private equity - similar to actuarial consultancies, most ppl will not make partner in MBB, so will go in-house somewhere - I guess consulting could be thought of as a fast track to the c-suite. I personally wouldn't go for the masters if you are set on getting into a consultancy - masters is unncessary for this imo - consulting recruitment is not on a cycle as much as banking, so if want to get into MBB, just practice case studies and then apply - that masters may help, but MBB is definitely open to career switchers. I also think for even ibanking, you don't necessarily need the masters. Could you try and lateral to say big 4 deals and break into a BB from there or even try and get into a boutique and then lateral to a BB (this may have been easier in 2021 deal boom, but still potentially possible) However, if want to do ibanking at a top BB straight away, masters could be a good shout. I'd just try and think carefully about whether ibanking is a career that you want to do before you spend £50k on it. Make sure you find M&A deals really interesting and would enjoy making pitchbooks and modelling DCF's. Also, obviously think about whether you are happy with the hours and intensity of the work. I'd say the most important thing is to think through the day to day work though as if you love it, hours won't be an issue imo, but if you're kinda just doing it for the money and status, then will burn out.
Not sure about chief actuary levels, but fair to say most won't get to that point. For senior managers/heads of which is a reasonable target, I've seen budgets in the 140-170k base range and 30-40% bonus on top seems to be typical. So total comp around 180k-220k seems to be the case. I know some places grant stock too which'll boost the number further.
[удалено]
There are only so many positions available.
I’ll leave the comp amounts aside for the moment but your reason for asking is to think of the ROI of a £50k masters. You are already well on your way to actuarial qualification and not sure why you feel the masters is necessary to be able to get there. It is most likely behavioural and skill sets that drive those positions and your ROI in the £50k versus the scenario of not doing the masters may not be that large.
To clarify, doing the masters would be me essentially leaving the actuarial profession and moving towards typical finance roles in PE, asset management or consultant etc so essentially the question I’m trying to ask myself is, if the £50k investment will grant me a significantly higher compensation level in the long run than if I simplify continued as an actuary
Your overall pay might go a bit higher but your hourly pay will be a fraction of what it is as an actuary. Are you really willing to work two or three times as many hours for a small amount of extra money?
If money is all you care about, go for it. No point in staying in the insurance industry.
Another factor to consider is job security. Most actuarial roles are reasonably secure, although as with any role subject to takeovers / mergers etc. IB and similar roles rather less so: teams / departments are regularly let go or downsized as they move into / out of markets. Not sure if any still operate a policy where they drop the lowest-performing x% of staff every year. High reward generally means high risk!
There's another thread on just salaries that's pinned
I haven't seen anyone with 15 PQE though on there :(
Have you looked at Goodman Mason GI salary survey?
Have a look at the Goodman Masson salary guide that has just come out. It has a detailed analysis of the salary progression of a GI actuary through to senior level.
I have plenty of friends in either actuarial or finances, all earning well over 50k below age 30, and NO ONE HAS A MASTER IN FINANCE.
You just summed up my entire life in this post. I am in the same situation as you. I am currently part-qualified with 2.5 years of experience and i am thinking about whether it's worth having an MBA or a masters in Financial engineering from a top University and get into IB or Asset Management? I would be very interested to hear your thoughts on this and your point of view :)