Claremont Mckenna vs. UChicago for IB
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Trending Content
Career Resources
WSO Free Modeling Series - Now Open Through
April 30, 2024
9 Free Financial Modeling Lessons
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
+Bonus: Get 27 financial modeling templates in swipe file
+Bonus: Get 27 financial modeling templates in swipe file
God kills a kitten every time someone on WSO posts about choosing a school based on arbitrary preconceived notions of the average appearance of the female students.
CMC has a lot of pretty women? Not that many when I stayed there for a few days.
Comparing CMC to UC for finance recruitment would be a mistake. No comparison. UC itself has a poor social scene, but you do have the city of Chicago. You don't have any city to lean on at CMC.
Both have a reputation as being for students who didn't quite make Ivy. I would say CMC is better for finance recruiting since it has lesser competition on the west coast -- just Stanford and Berkeley. Whereas, Chicago needs to compete with Columbia, Penn, Harvard, Duke, etc. for NYC.
Plus, you can study finance at CMC.
I don't know anything about CMC, but this seems like kind of a strange question...
Chicago is a target for all BBs and elite MMs, as well as boutiques in Chicago and NYC. Perhaps CMC has similar recruitment opps, but it seems unlikely.
Disclaimer: I could be totally wrong.
x
Like I said, the recruiting isn't comparable. For trading, Chicago is a top target for every HF/prop shop/bank. For IB, the only place CMC would beat out Chicago is on the west coast. NYC/Chicago/Int'l, Chicago 100% places better. It's just a fact.
For social life, you may have a better time at CMC. UChicago undergrad itself is certainly not the most fun experience of all time, but you do have a city available (that most people don't take advantage of) and you can make the most of it if you try. CMC's girls did not stand out at all to me in the slightest bit, so I hope that isn't what you're going there for. There are attractive girls at UC--I mean give me a break man. The numbers are small, but again, CMC is far from a bastion of hotties. You're talking mostly upper-middle class priviledged white/Asian chicks that wouldn't stand out anywhere, including at UC.
What I'm confused by is why you aren't looking at Duke more seriously given your preferences. I mean, CMC is a significant tier below all 3 of the schools you mentioned in terms of recruiting, esp. for finance, and definitely in terms of academics. I don't even know if the SF recruiting would be any better since you'd be competing with UCB/Stanford/CalTech. At best, you'd have better LA prospects and that's really it without a lot of networking.
The main benefit is that you get warm weather, decent social life in the sense that the academics are light and people like to party/you don't get brutalized academically, and the school can be affordable with the right financial aid packages that they seem to give some people.
Chicago is top dog (along with Northwestern) for Chicago recruiting. Likewise, Chicago is a much larger financial hub than LA. It also opens up the chance to work in the city during the school year.
CMC is a great school, but LA offices are tiny. You are competing with Stanford, Berkeley, UCLA, USC, and Pomona College. Also,way more people from Ivies and East Coast targets want to work in LA than Chicago. A BB in LA might take ~4 summers.
You can certainly get an offer at Claremont. It is just that the odds are likely better in Chicago.
x
I would go to Claremont man. CMC was my top choice coming out of HS and I was upset that I did not get in. Chicago will present you with better recruiting, that's for sure, but not significantly better I do not believe. People forget to think about their present value, aka how much they will enjoy college. I guarantee you will have a great time at CMC, visit the campus and tell me it isn't fantastic, and it's a top 10 liberal arts school so the recruiting will be there.
Chicago is a top choice school for about half the kids living between the Rockies and the Appalachians. It has a (rare) conservative culture at a top ten global academic institution.
The question is whether or not you think you want to work on the west coast. If you do, Claremont Mckenna is probably a good choice; otherwise, Chicago is your best bet.
^ Claremont is also pretty conservative as well. I know lots of kids who went to CMC and work IB BB.
Stop asking random people online and just visit both in person. You'll know which one you like more.
Culcet, is correct. Visit both.
If you could get into Chicago, why couldn't you get into UCLA or Berkeley? Recruiting might be slightly more comparable than CMC.
x
I 100% agree with Jerome, but for the record, both of us are biased. I grew up five miles from Hyde Park and Jerome is an alumn.
I'm not sure you're giving up anything by going to UC over Duke -- the schools are extremely similar in terms of recruitment, just have different academic and social circles. As someone who has been associated with both of these institutions, I personally prefer the vibe at UC, but to each his own.
I'm not sure that putting UC/CMC in a league together, and more strangely, apart from Duke/Dartmouth is the way to slice the pie. You're not losing anything by going to UC over any of these places, but I would imagine you lose a lot of NYC recruiting appeal by going to CMC. Just my $0.02.
x
That's the trickier question. I am a gung-ho fan of Chicago, but a lot of that is on cultural grounds, and I would be a hypocrite to tell you to choose Chicago over Claremont when I am telling other people to choose Chicago over Wharton.
I do think you're giving up something on the recruiting front and you are setting yourself up for a future on the west coast rather than in the Midwest/East. If you like the culture on the West Coast, though, (hopefully you have a lot of friends out there) that's not a big loss.
Once you're making $100K/year, careers aren't very important. You have to figure out what makes you happy. I'm not sure you'll land in IBD, but you'll be able to make $100K/year four or five years out of Claremont. So if Claremont's culture and California's culture makes you a lot happier than Chicago, I don't think you're giving up a whole lot.
OP, I am new to the industry so I'm the wrong person to ask, but as someone who is not located in NYC (maybe later on), I feel that future financiers get the best opportunities there. When I interviewed for the position that I have recently accepted, the MD told me something along the lines of "the West Coast and Southeast are fine places to build finance careers, but if you really want to make it big, and you're smart enough to hack it, you've gotta go to NYC".
I basically agree wholly with what IP wrote in the above post. If you feel that you'll fit better with West Coast culture, which of course is hard to say for certain now, you aren't making a mistake by going to CMC. If you do aspire to live in NYC at some point in the near future, however, UC is definitely going to help you go the distance.
In any event, if the school is a strong target, like Duke, the fact that it's in Durham doesn't matter -- I know plenty of kids from Duke who got offers at Goldman, Lazard Freres, Evercore, JPM, the list goes on and on and on. I'm sure you already know this, but much of this game is going to come down to how hard you network...Chicago having the larger alumni base will give you a boost there, but it's still on you to put in the hours reaching out.
Claremont-McKenna has a small but powerful circle of alumni in finance. Henry Kravis and George Roberts, founders of KKR, were both Claremont-McKenna alums and are involved with the school. At the end of the day, I think recruiting opportunities will slightly favor University of Chicago simply because, at the margins, more people identify with the U-Chicago name / brand. However, I personally suggest you choose Claremont-McKenna for the quality of the education. A true liberal arts education is invaluable and I love the way these institutions groom thinkers. You may not necessarily get the best finance education at a place like CMC, but the ethos of the place will force you to think outside of the finance's rigidities and offer you a more fun & fulfilling academic experience.
At the end of the day, it really depends on what you want. If you are a finance-buff looking at specific quant-type jobs (i.e hedge funds or investment management), you will love UChicago and the recruiting will be there for you. However, you seem to be a long-term strategic thinker who also plans to atttain a MBA one day - thus, I think a liberal arts Claremont-McKenna education would round you out more as a person.
Of all reasons to choose CMC > UC, that is probably the worst reason. I dated somebody from CMC and went to UC myself, saw the curricula, etc. UChicago has arguably one of the strongest and most thorough core curriculum in the country for undergrads. Hell, it is probably one of the main things the school is known for. CMC is arguably the 3rd best college on its own campus.
UChicago is more liberal arts than CMC.
x
x
There is not much point in debating the recruitment thing. UC is a target in all areas of finance and a top target for some and that's outside of the city of Chicago (within Chicago, it is a top target for everything). The only west coast comparables are Stanford and UCB. I'm not sure CMC is even top 5 within the state of California.
I am a 'recent' grad (within the last 3 years). Contacting professors, even the very best, is incredibly easy. I've been to the homes of many as have many of my peers. I keep in touch with a few as well. These are also some of the top academics in their respective fields, not some schmoes.
To be honest, I probably have been on the CMC campus more than you have and I never even applied there. The weather was great, the dorms were subpar, the food was on par or better than Chicago. The people looked normal, nothing unusual. That is the list of pros I can think of when it comes to making a list of CMC vs UC. UC far surpasses CMC in pretty much everything academically, recruiting wise, opportunity wise as both an undergrad and down the line (whether it be in finance, academia, etc.) outside of stuff in SoCal (maybe).
The discussion can end there. I don't think you've done your research if you think Chicago is a purely 'numbers' world, focus on the LA curriculum of CMC (do you even understand UChicago's core or the history of the school? econ is arguably not even its most well-known or rigorous program academically), and all in the same breadth talk about the attractiveness of the student body. If you're hard working and smart, you will succeed at either school, so go where you think you'll be the happiest. I will say that I don't think Chicago is for you based on your posts.
x
Ok so I created an account just to respond this. I went to pitzer, arguably the least finance focused schools of the Claremont colleges. I am currently in my second year at a BB here in California. Now to clear up some of the misconceptions. As much as Jerome would argue against it, cmc is a fantastic school and is very respected in the finance community, both here in the west coast and in new york. The Claremont colleges as a whole are the third most represented school in the west coast finance community with a growing presence in new york. Even during the recession when I still attended, we had almost every major firm and several elite boutiques come and recruit, along with bcg and Bain if you're ever interested in consulting. I interned my junior year at a bb in new york and came back here for full time because of family. Basically, with solid grades and internships you are extreamly prepared for a full time gig in IB. Now the most important part which is your college experience. Chicago and cmc are very different places, and you should visit both to experience the culture. That said, Claremont students don't leave campus very often, not because of distance but because no one wants to leave. You have already stated the uchicago stereotypes. The cmc dorms are beautiful, the food at all the campuses are great, and the girls within all the 5cs are going to be much better than at Chicago. You will not be disappointed in terms of quality of life.
U mad about the facts, bruh?
CMC is not a target of pretty much any firm outside of the west coast. For example, not a single top HF or prop shop has OCR there, but they certainly do recruit out of Stanford, UCB, and CalTech. There is no point debating it because it's simply a fact. That doesn't mean the school or its body of students and faculty is bad, just that it isn't a finance or consulting target for whatever reason.
It is not a bad school at all--you can certainly have a great academic experience there if you choose to make the most of it. That doesn't mean the academics as a whole can compare to an elite institution or even a top public with greater resources (ie UCB/UCLA or Big10, UT, UVA, etc.). I don't know why you're so up in arms about it as no place is perfect and most far from it. UChicago is substantially below HPWS for recruiting in just about everything. I don't think that means it is a bad school, but it's quite a bit below those schools in terms of recruiting and to believe differently would be misguided. That doesn't make me any less proud to have gone there or happy with my education, I just realize it isn't at the top of the food chain, just as I would expect you'd realize that re: CMC's recruiting.
And where did the idea that CMC have hot girls come from? No, they aren't ugly, but that's not saying much and you're stuck in a fairly small bubble there anyway.
Ullam omnis voluptatum repudiandae incidunt et quia. Totam harum beatae facere error iure eligendi. Totam dolore quis eaque vero eveniet reprehenderit inventore ex.
Repellendus expedita vero officiis et. Aut mollitia veniam optio est voluptatem qui accusamus. Assumenda ut sit sunt omnis non. Dolores nulla maiores laboriosam blanditiis. Nemo deleniti accusantium accusamus qui quisquam.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Molestiae natus aliquam molestiae occaecati et. Harum ipsa in fugit molestiae ea. Ab odio sunt tenetur.
Porro fuga architecto libero. Quia praesentium ut aperiam dolores. Tempora qui itaque et qui et enim.
Recusandae earum ut ut autem. Magnam in vero asperiores illum. Aut vel suscipit iure corrupti nostrum molestias.
Et voluptatem est sint sit. Numquam quae ut nobis quae voluptate.