Investment Bank Tier List Australia: The Two Axes That Actually Decide Your Career
Everyone in Australia says they want to "get into banking." Almost nobody who says it can actually explain what that means, because "banking" isn't one job. It's a grid. Where you land on that grid, not whether you "got into banking," is what decides the career you actually end up with.
According to Alex Euripidou, the exact same job title, M&A, can grade out as an SSS-tier career at a bulge bracket bank or roughly an A-tier career doing corporate advisory at a Big Four firm, depending purely on which bank tier and which desk you land on.
That is the whole point of this breakdown. Two axes decide everything: the tier of the bank, and the desk you sit on inside it. Miss either axis and you can do everything "right" on paper and still end up in a completely different career to the one you thought you were signing up for.
What is the bank tier axis in Australian investment banking?
The first axis is the tier of the bank itself. From the top down, the tiers are:
- Bulge bracket
- Potential bulge
- Elite boutique
- International
- Specialist
- Big Four corporate finance
This is the axis most students actually think about when they say "I want to get into banking." It's the one that shows up in comparison threads and forum arguments about which logo looks best on a CV. It matters, but on its own it doesn't tell you what your day to day career actually looks like. That's what the second axis is for.
What is the desk axis, and why does it matter as much as the bank?
The second axis is the desk. Inside any bank, not every desk is doing the same kind of work, or getting rated the same way by the market. In rough order:
- M&A, the desk most people mean when they picture "investment banking." Considered the king desk.
- Leveraged finance (lev fin)
- Sponsors
- Coverage
- Capital markets, generally ranked lower than the desks above it
- Restructuring, which mostly lives at the Big Four rather than at bulge bracket or elite boutique banks
The desk axis is where most of the confusion happens. Two graduates can both say "I work in investment banking" and be doing genuinely different jobs with different exit options, different hours profiles and different long-term trajectories, purely because of which desk they landed on.
The tier list: same job title, different career
This is the part that actually changes how you should think about your own targeting. The bank tier and the desk combine to decide the real outcome, not either axis alone.
| Bank tier | Desk | Real-world grade |
|---|---|---|
| Bulge bracket | M&A | SSS |
| Big Four | Corporate advisory | A |
Same industry. Same rough job title on LinkedIn. Completely different career. The bulge bracket M&A seat and the Big Four corporate advisory seat are not interchangeable, even though a first-year student scanning both job ads might read them as the same thing.
Why do people keep chasing "banking" instead of a tier and a desk?
Because "get into banking" is an easy sentence to say and a genuinely hard grid to research. Bank names are public and easy to rank in your head. Desks are internal, less visible from outside, and the language ("coverage," "sponsors," "lev fin") isn't explained anywhere a first-year student is likely to stumble across it. So the shorthand "I want investment banking" survives even though it hides the two decisions that actually matter.
The fix isn't complicated, it's just rarely spelled out: pick the tier you're targeting, and pick the desk you're targeting, as two separate decisions. Don't let "banking" stand in for both.
How should a student actually use this when picking targets?
Treat it as a two-step filter, not a single "did I get into banking" checkbox.
- Work out which bank tier is realistic and desirable for your situation, bulge bracket, potential bulge, elite boutique, international, specialist, or Big Four corporate finance.
- Work out which desk you actually want, M&A, lev fin, sponsors, coverage, capital markets, or restructuring, and understand that desk's position in the pecking order.
- Target applications at the intersection, not just at "any banking role at any bank."
Getting this wrong is how someone ends up technically "in banking" and still feels like they missed the outcome they were actually chasing.
Want the fuller picture before you start targeting applications? Read the free AUS Complete Guide briefing, it maps the full year-by-year pathway across IB, consulting, law and tech so you're not guessing at timing on top of guessing at tiers: https://alexeuripidou.com/products/all-tracks-aus-complete-guide-briefing?utm_source=blog&utm_medium=organic&utm_campaign=post-twin-bank-tier-desk-axis
Is a bulge bracket always better than an elite boutique?
Not automatically, and the tier list above is about ranking desks and tiers on the SSS-to-A scale, not declaring one bank "better" than another for every person. A bulge bracket sits above an elite boutique on the general tier axis, but the desk you land on inside either one still changes the real outcome. An M&A seat at a strong elite boutique can outrank a weaker desk at a bulge bracket bank in terms of the actual work and exits.
Why is M&A considered the king desk?
Because of where it sits at the top of the desk axis in the breakdown above, M&A is the desk most associated with the classic investment banking career, and it's the reference point the other desks, lev fin, sponsors, coverage and capital markets, are generally measured against.
Is Big Four corporate finance the same as investment banking?
It's adjacent, not identical. Big Four corporate finance and restructuring work sit at the bottom of the bank tier axis and mostly live there rather than at bulge bracket or elite boutique banks. Someone in Big Four corporate advisory can have a very similar sounding title to someone in bulge bracket M&A, which is exactly the SSS-versus-A gap this breakdown is built around.
Where does capital markets rank on the desk axis?
Lower than M&A, lev fin, sponsors and coverage, based on the ordering in the breakdown above. That doesn't mean it's a bad desk to be on, it means it's rated differently by the market than the desks above it, which matters when you're weighing offers or planning a target list.
What should I actually target if I only know I want "banking"?
Stop targeting "banking" as a single goal. Pick a bank tier you're realistically aiming for, then pick a desk within it. The two-axis grid in this article is the tool for that decision, not the bank's name on its own.
How do I figure out which tier and desk actually fit my situation?
That's exactly what Career Path Mapping is built for, a personalised, 1:1 pass over your specific university, year, and goals that maps the realistic tier and desk targets for you rather than a generic list: https://alexeuripidou.com/products/career-path-mapping?utm_source=blog&utm_medium=organic&utm_campaign=post-twin-bank-tier-desk-axis
This started as a post on my Instagram, follow for the next one.
Once you've got the tier and the desk sorted in your head, the next step is firm-by-firm targeting inside your chosen tier, WAM thresholds, timing, and which desks are actually hiring at which banks. That's what the AUS IB Top 300 Firms Playbook is built for: https://alexeuripidou.com/products/investment-banking-aus-top-300-firms-playbook?utm_source=blog&utm_medium=organic&utm_campaign=post-twin-bank-tier-desk-axis