Sorry for adding to the 'help me please' threads but looking for some advice here.Currently analyst in a big 4 consulting firm (10 months) and thinking about leaving to do ACA at at PWC with a view to moving to equity research/sales at an IB.Best bet to just stay here, work hard and do mba in a few years or leave and do ACA now?

Is ACA on a par with consulting? I’m about to apply to the big 4’s risk auditing services (ie Deloitte’s ERS) – but I assumed that this would be easier/less work than consulting. Am I wrong?

ERS work with consulting on some projects. work is slighty different, not neccessarily easier... promotion however seems to be quicker

At the majority of the big four accounting firms you will be able to study for an ACA within the advisory/consulting arms. KPMG Financial Services Performance practice for example.

But it's less hardcore hours though? 9-6 most days?

pretty much - then it's easy to go into IB after 3 years and make a wad (i.e. 6 figures including bonus).

Bit of a thread jack but I guess this thread is dead already.Does anyone know of an accounting forum like this one? I’m sure there must be some good ones, but most of the ones I have stumbled across have been pretty rubbish.

There used to be one called 'counting fish' or something similar, which was a spin off from the www.rollonfriday.com site (for lawyers). But I think it died from under-use. You could try going on to Roll on Friday to ask whether anyone can remember what happened to it?

I'm trying to gather information about different accounting firms, but I’m finding one part of it rather difficult. All the people that work for one of the big 4 say that an ACA from those firms is much better respected than one from one of the other accounting firms; conversely those that don’t insist that there is no difference. This seems to make sense as the exams are the same across the board, but I can’t really see much other benefit for training with the big 4 aside from the prestige. Therefore I thought I’d ask people outside of the accounting circle: Are the big 4 thought of as better than the others?

In a word, yes. They have the biggest clients, fees etc. Your question is just like asking are non-MBB strategy firms just the same as MBB, or are non-league sides better than the premiership. Of course the actual ACA itself is the same, but the quality and breadth of client work isn't at all, as well as additional non-ACA training, including the calibre of managers etc. who you learn from. Yes, there is the prestige factor - but this is simply a relfection of what I said above. Also, it is harder to work for big4 and so people from there are usually filtered out from the rest to start with. In short, go for the big4. Many/ all of the best jobs stipulate for ACA qualified from these firms.

Cheers pal. I was kind of assuming the opposite of some of what you've said. "Of course the actual ACA itself is the same, but the quality and breadth of client work isn't at all, as well as additional non-ACA training, including the calibre of managers etc. who you learn from." I was under the impression that the breadth of the training would be greater in a smaller firm, and that I might get stuck in one area when training with one of the bigger ones. But I suppose if I think that that might be the case I can always jump ship at a later date. Thanks for your views on the matter!

Well, you are right. At somewhere smaller you will get shifted round sectors more, but at a big firm you can request to change and will have more choice. More importantly, you will work with the most prestigious clients.