Any CorpFin people who decided to get their CPA - How much did it help you?

I'm curious on this issue as well. As someone in FP&A, I've been trying to decide lately on whether I should sit for the CPA exam or not. Insight would be very helpful! @"Lester Freamon" @"crackjack" and @"GoIllini" would you guys be able to help us out :P?

Having the CPA license will likely not hurt your chances for top MBA if your work experience was decent enough. Not the CPAs per se but Big 4 guys are usually having harder times getting accepted into top programs. Otherwise, there are some CPAs in equity research, for example, and they tend to do better than pure accounting folks.

@"freddyflintstone" In my opinion, if you're planning on staying in FP&A I don't think sitting for the CPA exam would be beneficial. The exam can be time consuming (it took me about 6 months working full time to pass all four parts), and there's very little add value to the work you would be doing. Additionally, unless you're working under another licensed CPA, you wouldn't be able to get the required experience to be licensed as a CPA, so you'd never be able to actually put "CPA" on a business card or a resume. People may still get you credit for passing, but it's not the same thing as being a licensed CPA (kind of like someone who's passed the CFA exam is not the same as someone who is a CFA charterholder).

Interestingly enough, I'm starting to make my transition from public accounting to the private sector, and I've been looking at a number of financial analyst positions. Most of them want some kind of financial analysis experience, but I've probably only seen one or two that wanted the person to be a CPA (usually as a "preferred" qualification). If you're looking to stay in FP&A, your work experience is probably going much more weight. If you're looking break out, it's probably going to be situational as to whether or not the CPA would be helpful.

As to the OP's question, I can't really give advice to the CorpFin part, but as to the MBA, from what I've researched the issue really isn't that someone is a CPA, but the question is why a CPA also needs an MBA. If you're staying in an accounting-type role, the CPA designation is the end all to career trajectory. Very rarely does a CPA also need an MBA to move up on accounting roles. Typically, the CPAs you do see applying for MBAs are those trying to transition into other fields, like Finance or Consulting. You won't see CPAs do 3-5 years at a Big 4, get an MBA, and transition to private sector jobs. It's usually a straight jump into the private sector.

Considering you're in Internal Audit, I would worry about branding yourself even more as an accounting-type person. I would instead look into the CFA exam. That way at least you can show that you have finance-based interests, and not reinforcing the accounting stereotype of an auditor. It would probably be a better spin if you decide to apply for MBAs as well. But that's just my two cents.

Having worked in CF for several years at multiple F50 companies I can tell you that a good number of the CFOs of various business units I've seen have this credential. If you opt not to do an MBA then the CPA will be your best bet for moving into Executive level roles. Chances are your company would sponsor an MBA though so that would still be preferential. But make sure you actually WANT a career in corporate finance. Opportunities in this space open up moreso because of tenure and attrition, so unless you're willing to hop around frequently (which has helped me immensely) it can be difficult to boost salary and/or build a good trajectory.

I want to first make a disclaimer that I'm not any sort of authority on this stuff since I've only started working. That said, I'm not sure I agree with the poster who says that the CPA would not be beneficial for FP&A type jobs. From what I've seen, many jobs in corp fin are accounting-heavy and you'll have to perform tasks such as monthly closes, reconciliations, etc. For tasks like this, a CPA is useful. Sure, there are pure FP&A type roles that have limited to none of these types of responsibilities, but those aren't commonplace and would likely want someone who worked in IB/Consulting anyway.

That said, I do agree that the exam is a bit of a grind and you'll have to do some thinking about what you want in the future to see whether or not it's worth it. Coincidentally enough, I found out just today that I am done with the exam having passed my last part and I can attest that it's not easy to do this while working (at least in public accounting). The CPA exam isn't that hard, but it's very frustrating because you'll be asked to know a lot of topics in decent depth and only a few of those topics will even be tested. If you're on a site like this, I'm guessing you're more motivated than the average joe and reasonably smart, but the exam will mostly test your will to put in the hours necessary to learn all the information rather than your talent.

If you think you can see yourself taking up controller/CFO or anything that would require external reporting/costing in the future, I think the CPA is well worth your time and it won't close off the "pure" finance roles either. If you're like the majority of the forum that wants mostly classic finance roles, I think your efforts may be better spent networking or doing something else than chasing the certification. As mentioned before, the CPA won't close doors, but the cost-benefit analysis at that point becomes more personal and I think the certification will be more of a cherry on top than something that distinguishes you from the pack.

I'd say get your CPA. Also look at what the people in the positions you want to be in have. If they have a CPA, get it. If they don't, that doesn't mean you shouldn't, but think about why they might not have it (not necessary at the time? got lucky?)

You will see many CPAs in financial analyst roles, but it is definitely not a requirement. I don't have a CPA and got hired without any certifications. I later got the CMA, which only requires 2 years of professional corp fin or accounting experience. It also requires only 2 exams instead of 4, so I was able to get certified within 9 months.

Some CPAs will look down on CMAs because of the lower barrier to entry, but I found it to be worthwhile. I work at a privately held mid-size company where we focus only on management reporting, so a lot of the exam material is very relevant to the role.

anyone who says the CPA is not a valuable designation for corporate finance simply does not know what they are talking about. is it your golden ticket to the top of the food chain? no. i don't care if you have a CPA and a harvard mba, if you suck at your job and don't have leadership qualities you will not be put into a managerial or executive position.

go on any job listing site and look at requirements for manager of finance, director of finance, or even the VP and up levels...most will commonly cite "CPA and/or MBA" as a requirement...last time i checked the cost of an MBA is upwards of $100K. you can pass the CPA for around $4K, and that's including the cost of a top prep course (becker).

Agree with all these points. I see it as one of two options: if you are in an accounting role and you intend to stay in one (which IMO includes corp fin), having the CPA is a huge plus. As you have already seen, pretty much every corp fin manager and above has it. On the other hand, if you're in an accounting/auditing role and expect to "break out" into something different (finance, consulting) the CPA serves more as a barrier to entry than a plus, but you still need it. Breaking into one of these implies you are at the top of your field, which means having the CPA.

So either way, it would benefit you to get it. I understand the opportunity cost involved but I always maintain that accountants and auditors without the CPA will most likely be viewed as lazy or unmotivated.