Senior GTM AnalystNebius · Austin, Texas, United States; Remote - United States; San Francisco Bay Area, California, United States; United States

Senior GTM Analyst

🗓️ Posted 2026-09-01 Austin, Texas, United States; Remote - United States; San Francisco Bay Area, California, United States; United States Hybrid ICT
💰 Salary Not shared 📊 Market 10,000 EUR–16,667 EUR/mo

About the Company

Nebius is leading a new era in cloud infrastructure for the global AI economy. We are building a full-stack AI cloud platform that supports developers and enterprises from data and model training through to production deployment, without the cost and complexity of building large in-house AI/ML infrastructure. Built by engineers, for engineers. From large-scale GPU orchestration to inference optimization, we own the hard problems across compute, storage, networking and applied AI. Listed on Nasdaq (NBIS) and headquartered in Amsterdam, we have a global footprint with R&D hubs across Europe, the UK, North America and Israel. Our team of 1,500+ includes hundreds of engineers with deep expertise across hardware, software and AI R&D.

About the Role

We are looking for a Senior GTM Analyst to join our Sales Operations / GTM Analytics team. This role will own core GTM reporting and analytics, lead high-impact analytical workstreams, and help leadership make better decisions on commercial performance, capacity, coverage, and GTM investment. This is a hands-on analytics role for someone who can build useful reports, but also understands the data, systems, and business process behind them. You will work across Salesforce, Postgres/YTsaurus, Tableau, Excel, and other sources to turn messy commercial data into reliable reporting, analytical models, clear insights, and practical recommendations. You will work closely with GTM leadership and operators to answer questions like: Where is pipeline being created Which segments are converting Are territories balanced Where are reps losing time How should we allocate capacity and investment Is the dashboard showing the truth, or is it reflecting bad data, weak definitions, or broken source logic underneath