Pros
Lively, active environment with a lot of technology being developed. Strong government oversight and astute lending practices make it very unlikely that the bank will fail like so many did in the 1980s and 1990s. Unlike the leaders of so many S&Ls and small commercial banks that grew rapidly and failed in the deregulated environments of the past, senior management at Axos is quite sophisticated financially. They are not local yokels who got too big for their britches, such has happened with several other San Diego institutions in the past. I have little doubt that Axos will continue to grow past $10 billion and beyond. The people who are responsible for asset preservation and risk management are doing a very credible job. In addition to financial skill, Axos has been successful at implementing a strong internal culture of compliance and auditability. Shady activities and dishonesty are not tolerated. Axos does fire people who get caught lying, making inappropriate expenditures, etc. The only thing that I believe might stop them would be a rapidly growing institution that is even more aggressive with Internet-based technology and does a better job of implementing it.
Cons
Management has very little skill at gauging the productivity or performance of people who are not engaged in clearly revenue-generating activities. If you are in facilities management, IT, security, or tech support it can be very difficult to make a case for a promotion or meaningful pay increase. The turnover in most business units is very high, and management bends over backwards to avoid being held accountable for the ongoing brain drain. There is a very small core of a few dozen people who have been at the bank for more than five years, with a large majority of turnovers happening in less than three years. The company brags that it has never laid anyone off, and that is likely true. Non-management people who fall out of favor but haven't done anything to justify being fired for cause are typically driven out through pay cuts, with their decisions to leave attributed to reasons that superficially can't be blamed on poor management. For example, managers will document a person's reasons for quitting as being unhappy with the "pace" of the company or just "family reasons," when in reality they were chosen to be replaced by less experienced individuals who have fewer commitments that affect work/life balance. (If you read that to mean younger people, you may be right.) Managers who don't fit in with the current incarnation of the "old boy" network are shown the door but given generous severance deals tied to strong non-disclosure agreements. You will probably never see a review from an unhappy former manager posted here, or criticism of the company in the media by a former manager. The discrepancy in pay between management and non-management people borders on obscene. Unless you are very high in the company or an exceptionally successful commissioned sales person, your pay will always be sub-par.
