Equity Research interview preparation

Questions

100

Traced to a firm

72

Firms

45

Updated

September 2026

Asked at

All firmsMorningstar12Man Group6Balyasny Asset Management5BLBlackRock5FTFranklin Templeton5MSCI5Jefferies4CSCredit Suisse3Fidelity Investments3Moody's3Perella Weinberg Partners3Point723S&P Global3The Vanguard Group3WMWellington Management3Advent International2Apollo Global Management2Bank of America2Carlyle Group2DED.E. Shaw2Houlihan Lokey2HSBC2Piper Sandler2Sequoia Capital2SSState Street2Viking Global Investors2WBWilliam Blair2ACAQR Capital Management1BGBaupost Group1BMBNY Mellon1Centerview Partners1Coatue Management1Goldman Sachs1GSGuggenheim Securities1HWHarris Williams1Insight Partners1Invesco1Mizuho1Moelis & Company1MSMorgan Stanley1PIMCO1SCSchroders1Scotiabank1T. Rowe Price1TSTruist Securities1

Topic

All topicsResearch process9Stock pitch6Company analysis8Investment philosophy5Valuation14Modelling2Portfolio and risk8Macro8Sector knowledge2Accounting8Career and fit12Industry knowledge6Quantitative research1Sector: technology3Sector: consumer1Sector: healthcare1Sector: energy1Sector: financials2Sector: industrials1Case and estimation2

Level

AnyCoreIntermediateHard

Type

AnyTechnicalCaseFitBrainteaserMarket view

1. 065How would you allocate a $100 million mandate across a portfolio of funds?Portfolio and riskHardsuperdayMSCIRisk Management · Remote · 2013The Vanguard GroupInvestment Research · Malvern · 2024

   Say this

   Start from the objective and the constraints, not from the funds. Required return, risk tolerance, liquidity needs, time horizon and any restrictions. Then build the strategic asset allocation, then select managers within it.

   Then walk it

   1. Establish the mandate first: what return is required, over what horizon, with what drawdown tolerance, what liquidity is needed and what restrictions apply. Everything follows from these.
   2. Set the strategic asset allocation across asset classes. That decision drives the large majority of the variance in outcomes; manager selection is second-order.
   3. Then decide active versus passive by asset class. Use passive where markets are efficient and active where dispersion is high and there is evidence of persistent skill.
   4. Then select managers on process rather than past returns. Understand the source of the edge, whether the team is stable, whether assets have grown beyond the capacity of the strategy, and what the fee structure does to net returns.
   5. Then look at the combination rather than each fund alone. Correlation between managers is what determines portfolio risk, and three managers running the same factor exposure is one position with three fee loads.
   6. Then build in the governance: rebalancing rules, review triggers, and a plan for what would cause redemption. Deciding the sell criteria in advance is what prevents performance-chasing.

   Where candidates lose it

   Jumping straight to picking funds. The correct structure is objectives, then asset allocation, then managers, then monitoring. Also, ignoring correlation between managers, which is the most common real-world error in multi-manager portfolios.

   Expect next

   • What risk-return targets would you set for an institutional investor?
   • How do you judge whether a manager has skill or luck?
   • How would you build a portfolio for different client needs?

   Reported by candidates at MSCI (Risk Management, Remote, 2013); The Vanguard Group (Investment Research, Malvern, 2024). Source: Wall Street Oasis.

2. 073How would you analyse an Indian bank versus a US bank?Sector: financialsHardtechnicalCSCredit SuisseInvestment Banking · Mumbai · 2020

   Say this

   The framework is the same, price to book against return on equity, but the drivers differ. Indian banks are a credit growth and asset quality story with a large public sector overhang; US banks are a rate cycle, fee income and capital return story.

   Then walk it

   1. Common framework: net interest margin, loan growth, cost-to-income, credit costs, and capital adequacy. Value on price to adjusted book against sustainable ROE.
   2. India-specific: asset quality dominates. Gross and net non-performing assets, provision coverage, slippage ratio and restructured book are the numbers the market trades on. The 2015 to 2020 asset quality review cycle is the reference point for why.
   3. Structural difference: a large public sector banking system with different governance, capitalisation and lending incentives from the private banks. The valuation gap between the two groups is persistent and is really a governance and growth gap.
   4. Growth profile: Indian banks operate in an underpenetrated credit market with structurally higher nominal loan growth, so the market pays for growth in a way it does not in the US.
   5. Funding: the CASA ratio, the share of low-cost current and savings deposits, is the key competitive advantage in India and is watched closely. In the US the equivalent focus is on deposit beta.
   6. US-specific: fee and trading income is a much larger share of revenue for the large banks, regulatory capital and stress testing drive buybacks, and the rate cycle drives net interest income more sharply.

   Where candidates lose it

   Applying a US framework wholesale. An India-based interviewer will expect CASA, slippages, provision coverage and the public-versus-private distinction by name. Knowing the local vocabulary is the test.

   Expect next

   • What is the CASA ratio and why does it matter?
   • Why do private banks trade at a premium to public sector banks?
   • How do you forecast credit costs through a cycle?

   Reported by candidates at Credit Suisse (Investment Banking, Mumbai, 2020). Source: Wall Street Oasis.

3. 085How would you analyse a company with related-party transactions or a controlling shareholder?Company analysisHardtechnicalIndian research desksEmerging market research

   Say this

   Treat governance as a valuation input rather than a footnote. Map every related-party flow, ask whether value is leaking out of the listed entity, and apply a discount if minority shareholders are not being treated equally.

   Then walk it

   1. Read the related-party transactions note in full and map the flows: who sells what to whom, at what price, and is there an independent benchmark for that price.
   2. The question is always whether the listed entity is transacting at arm's length. Buying raw materials from a promoter-owned entity above market, or selling output below it, transfers value out of the listed company.
   3. Watch for the classic structures: royalty or brand fees paid to the parent, shared services agreements, loans and guarantees to group companies, and asset purchases from related entities.
   4. Check pledged promoter shares. A promoter who has pledged a large proportion of their holding has an incentive problem and a forced-selling risk that can hit the stock independently of fundamentals.
   5. Look at the board: how many genuinely independent directors, who the auditor is, and whether auditors have resigned. An auditor resignation is one of the strongest negative signals available.
   6. Then price it. A governance discount is real and persistent, so the honest output is a lower multiple rather than a refusal to cover. But if you cannot verify that the cash belongs to minority shareholders, the correct answer is to avoid it, and saying that is a legitimate conclusion.

   Where candidates lose it

   Treating governance as a qualitative aside. In emerging markets it is frequently the dominant driver of returns. Naming pledged shares and auditor resignations shows real familiarity with how these situations actually unfold.

   Expect next

   • What is a promoter pledge and why does it matter?
   • How would you size a governance discount?
   • Would you ever refuse to cover a company?
4. 086Give me a two-line thesis on a company you would short.Stock pitchHardsuperdayBalyasny Asset ManagementGeneralist · New York · 2020

   Say this

   One line on the structural problem, one line on the catalyst that forces the market to see it. Something like: the company's growth is funded by discounting that is destroying its unit economics, and the covenant test at the next refinancing will expose it.

   Then walk it

   1. Line one has to be a mechanism, not a valuation. 'Expensive' is not a thesis. 'Gross margin has fallen 600 basis points over six quarters while revenue growth held up, because they are buying volume' is a mechanism.
   2. Line two is the clock: the specific event that makes the market agree. A refinancing, a covenant test, a contract renewal, a patent expiry, a competitor launch, a change in the disclosure that removes the cover.
   3. Then the numbers that support it, in one breath: the trend in the metric, and the gap between what management guides and what the trend implies.
   4. Then the risk: what would squeeze you. A cheap balance sheet, a possible takeover, heavy existing short interest, or a founder who could take it private.
   5. And the practicalities: borrow cost and days to cover, because a 20 percent borrow makes a slow thesis unprofitable even if you are right.
   6. Prepare a real one before you walk in. Being unable to construct a short is a common failure in buy-side interviews, and it reveals that you have only ever thought about why things go up.

   Where candidates lose it

   Not having one prepared. Long-short interviews ask for both sides, and candidates almost always have three longs and no shorts. Prepare one short properly, including the borrow cost and the squeeze risk.

   Expect next

   • What is the borrow?
   • What would squeeze you?
   • How would you size it?

   Reported by candidates at Balyasny Asset Management (Generalist, New York, 2020). Source: Wall Street Oasis.

5. 090How did you arrive at the assumptions in your case study?Research processHardcase studyDED.E. ShawGeneralist · New York · 2025Houlihan LokeyInvestment Banking · Richmond · 2025

   Say this

   Each assumption should trace to something external: a historical rate, a disclosed contract, an industry data point, a peer's experience. Name the source for each, and say which ones you are least confident about.

   Then walk it

   1. Go through them in order of importance to the answer, not in model order. The interviewer cares about the two that drive the result.
   2. For each, give the anchor: 'I used 6 percent price growth because that is what they have taken in each of the last four years and the contracts reprice annually to an index.'
   3. Where you had no data, say so explicitly and explain the logic you substituted. Inventing a source is fatal; reasoning openly from a gap is respected.
   4. Distinguish the assumptions that matter from the ones that do not. 'The tax rate assumption is immaterial; the retention assumption drives 70 percent of the value' shows you understand your own model.
   5. Present the sensitivity around the critical ones rather than defending a point estimate. The honest position is a range with a most likely case.
   6. And volunteer your least confident assumption before they find it. Doing so converts a vulnerability into evidence of self-awareness.

   Where candidates lose it

   Defending every assumption equally, or saying 'that is what management guided'. Guidance is an input to be tested, not a source of truth. Trace assumptions to independent evidence wherever possible.

   Expect next

   • Which assumption are you least confident about?
   • What if that assumption is 20 percent wrong?
   • Where did you disagree with management's guidance?

   Reported by candidates at D.E. Shaw (Generalist, New York, 2025); Houlihan Lokey (Investment Banking, Richmond, 2025). Source: Wall Street Oasis.

6. 097What do you think about a company like Google starting to pay a dividend?Company analysisHardtechnicalS&P GlobalDebt Capital Markets · Chicago · 2022

   Say this

   It is a signal about the reinvestment opportunity, and that signal cuts both ways. It says the company has more cash than it can deploy at high returns, which is maturity, but it also broadens the shareholder base and imposes discipline.

   Then walk it

   1. The positive reading: a commitment to return cash imposes capital discipline and reduces the risk of value-destructive acquisitions. It also makes the stock eligible for income and dividend-focused funds, widening the buyer base.
   2. The negative reading: initiating a dividend is an admission that the company cannot reinvest all its cash above the cost of capital. For a growth company that is a signal of maturity, and maturity usually means a lower multiple.
   3. Dividends are sticky in a way buybacks are not. Cutting one is punished severely, so initiating it is a long-term commitment that reduces flexibility.
   4. The alternative use question: if the shares are cheap, a buyback returns more value. If they are expensive, a dividend is the better instrument. So the choice itself tells you what management thinks about its own valuation.
   5. For a technology company specifically, there is a tension with stock-based compensation: paying a dividend while issuing shares to employees means returning cash with one hand and diluting with the other.
   6. So my read would be: mildly negative for the growth narrative, mildly positive for governance, and the market reaction usually depends on which of those two the shareholder base cares about more.

   Where candidates lose it

   Answering only 'it is good, shareholders get cash'. The interesting content is the signal about reinvestment opportunities and the stickiness of the commitment. Argue both sides and then take a position.

   Expect next

   • Would a buyback be better?
   • What does it do to the shareholder base?
   • How would a credit analyst view it?

   Reported by candidates at S&P Global (Debt Capital Markets, Chicago, 2022). Source: Wall Street Oasis.

Firm tags come from public, anonymous candidate reports on Wall Street Oasis: strong signal, not sworn testimony. Firms are named as the places a question was reported, not as partners of Fin Maverick. Answers are written for this page to show how to think out loud; they are not scripts to recite.