Hours and lifestyle reality

#The document this module is built around

In February 2021, thirteen first-year Goldman Sachs analysts compiled their own internal working-conditions survey and presented it to management; it leaked publicly in March 2021 and was reported first-hand by CNN, Forbes, and CNBC, each independently confirming the same figures from the same document. [Established] The respondents reported working an average of 105 hours in the week ending February 13, 2021, and 98 hours on average since the start of that January. Self-rated mental health fell from an average of 8.8 out of 10 before starting the job to 2.8 at the time of the survey; self-rated physical health fell from 9.0 to 2.3. All respondents said the hours had damaged their relationships with friends and family. [Established] — confirmed across multiple independently reporting named outlets covering the same leaked primary document.

Two caveats belong on that data point, stated plainly rather than smoothed away: it's a self-selected sample of thirteen respondents at one bank, not a random or representative survey of the industry, and it captures a specific, extraordinarily busy stretch (early 2021, mid-pandemic dealmaking boom) rather than a typical baseline year. [Established] for both caveats — they're acknowledged in the same reporting that surfaced the figures. The reason this course still leads with it rather than a "typical week" estimate: it's the single best-documented data point in this entire space, sourced to an actual internal document rather than to an aggregator's unsourced claim — and every other figure in this module is weaker evidence than that one.

#What changed afterward

Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon responded publicly within days, announcing plans to hire additional junior staff and to strengthen enforcement of an existing "Saturday rule" — analysts kept out of the office from 9pm Friday to 9am Sunday except in pre-approved, deal-critical circumstances. [Established] — Solomon's own public statement, reported by CNN and CNBC at the time. Other banks announced comparable measures in the following months: staffing increases, protected-weekend policies, and pay raises specifically framed as compensation for the hours rather than as a substitute for reducing them. [Directional]

#What the current reporting says

Later reporting is consistent that these reforms softened the edges of the job without changing its structure: analysts across multiple banks are still commonly reported working 70–80 hours a week in normal periods, materially above almost any other entry-level knowledge-work role, with hours spiking well above that during active live deals regardless of any stated policy. [Directional] — this is a consistent characterization across post-2021 industry reporting and practitioner accounts, not a single new leaked survey with the same evidentiary weight as the 2021 document; treat it as the honest current picture rather than as equally well-established fact.

The underlying reason the reforms only softened rather than fixed the problem, as characterized consistently across this reporting: the hours are driven by live deal deadlines and client demands that don't pause for an internal policy, and a protected-weekend rule that gets waived "when the deal requires it" waives itself most often during exactly the busiest, most demanding stretches an analyst experiences. [Directional]

#A specific number worth naming and rejecting

A claim that "85% of new banking analysts leave investment banking within their first two years" circulates in career-advice content on this topic. Tracing it in this research found it repeated without a cited source or stated methodology — no survey, no sample size, no named research body behind it. [Speculative] — flagged specifically, the same way this platform's other courses name and reject a fabricated statistic rather than letting it stand unchallenged. The broader, better-corroborated point the number is gesturing at — that first-two-year attrition in IB is genuinely high, well above a typical entry-level job — is plausible and consistent with the hours data above; the specific 85% figure is not something this research could verify and should not be repeated as fact.

#What this means for a candidate deciding whether to do this

The honest picture, stripped of both the "you'll never sleep" horror-story framing and the "it's not that bad, people exaggerate" downplaying: this is a genuinely demanding entry-level job, with hours reported in the 70–80/week range in normal periods and materially higher during live deals, in a culture where an official protected-weekend policy is real but gets overridden during exactly the periods it would matter most. [Directional] That's the reality a "why banking" answer in Module 03 should be built around actually wanting, not the reality a candidate discovers for the first time in week three of the job.