Do SAT Scores really matter?

From my short time on this site (about a week) there seems to be multiple mentions of SAT scores. While I understand them for maybe undergrad internships, why do some companies ask for SAT scores outside of internships? Also, the SAT score they focus on is usually Math correct?

 
Determined:
SAT scores don't really matter. Sometimes a really high SAT score might look good but unless its unusually low (Math and Reading) it really doesn't make a difference in anyone's eyes.

I've got 2390. Should I include this in my resume?

 
corilla:
I've got 2390. Should I include this in my resume?
Yeah I'd throw it in. My good friend got the same and he said it's never come up in conversation but he can tell it helps with making a good first impression.
 
jec:
I find that it is a decent indicator of intelligence, more so than gpa.
no offense, but thats absurd, lmao. the SAT (much like the GMAT) indicates one thing and one thing only, and thats how hard you studied for the SAT or GMAT. To say that one stupid ass test that purely dictates how hard you studied for it, shows more about intelligence than a 4 year track record of 40+ classes is highly questionable, lmao. As far as the OP's question, while I have seen it asked for on FT apps, it was rare enough that I would say this was by far the exception as opposed to the rule (you'll see the GMAT asked for more often, but it'll be more of a "if you have taken it" typa thing)
GBS
 

Really. You're SAT scores...You mean the test that requires some mundane math skills and has been memorized to the hilt by chinese students. Test is a joke, if anyone says they care about it it's most likely an extra filter just to keep resume reading to a minimum.

 

I'm going to contradict the majority here and say YES, it actually does matter in my experience. Aside from having it on my resume (still do - and you should too unless it sucks) I was asked specifically by my former boss when interviewing what my score was and what the breakdown was between Math and Reading or whatever the other one was called. I know there's 3 sections now so things might be a little different. They mostly want to know how you did on Math is my guess.

It's never gonna make or break you, but I definitely wouldn't say it doesn't matter. I still have my ACT and SAT on my resume, but nothing else from high school obviously. So it's important enough.

I hate victims who respect their executioners
 

I would also say it matters, especially for consulting. I've had MBB partners during a final round comment (positively) on my math score. Consulting firms out of undergrad specifically require your SAT score, and I know they are used as another data point to evaluate candidates.

 

There are two ways to look at it:

  1. It's well known that you can improve your score with a lot of prep, so SATs are meaningless since it doesn't mean you're smart.

  2. It's well known that you can improve your score with a lot of prep, so SATs mean a lot since it shows that you're either a) smart enough to get that score on your own or b) put the time in that you had to to get a great score.

I think it's #2, so I think they're important.

 

My impression was that the majority of people don't put their SAT on their resume anyway, unless it's extremely high.

That said, some people might look at SAT since it's a very simple (not necessarily appropriate or useful) way to compare applicants - it's something everyone has been through (whereas GPAs and course difficulty can vary due to school/major).

 

You can argue til you're blue in the face about whether the test is a good measure of one's expected performance on the job. The reality is that some people care and others don't care. At a bare minimum, most employers tend to at least collect the data. Obviously you want your score to be as high as possible, but by the time you're applying or jobs, there isn't much you can do to change it. Roll on and focus on other parts of your application.

CompBanker’s Career Guidance Services: https://www.rossettiadvisors.com/
 

The thing is, sure there are a bunch of stupid people who do well on the test. However, it still works pretty well as a filter. I don't know a single intelligent person (including those with ADHD, dyslexia, test anxiety problems) who scored below a 2200 on the first SAT practice test they took. And most of them can get it up to 2300+ with practice. So I feel like it's more of a warning signal to resume readers if you have like, and 1800 on the SAT, but once you're in a certain range I feel like it wouldn't make that much of a difference.

 
Warhead:
I don't know a single intelligent person (including those with ADHD, dyslexia, test anxiety problems) who scored below a 2200 on the first SAT practice test they took. And most of them can get it up to 2300+ with practice. So I feel like it's more of a warning signal to resume readers if you have like, and 1800 on the SAT,
Only on WSO, lol. I was under the impression 2200 was like ~98th percentile
GBS
 
GoldmanBallSachs:
Warhead:
I don't know a single intelligent person (including those with ADHD, dyslexia, test anxiety problems) who scored below a 2200 on the first SAT practice test they took. And most of them can get it up to 2300+ with practice. So I feel like it's more of a warning signal to resume readers if you have like, and 1800 on the SAT,
Only on WSO, lol. I was under the impression 2200 was like ~98th percentile

98.6%. You're right only on WSO can someone say, people aren't smart because they can't score over 2200..ridiculous.

The answer to your question is 1) network 2) get involved 3) beef up your resume 4) repeat -happypantsmcgee WSO is not your personal search function.
 

No correlation to success and it's been proven time after time. It only measures right brained intelligence and doesn't take into account creativity, communication skill, etc. If math skill was the #1 success indicator, asians would be on the cusp of world domination...but they're not

I think BeastMode nailed it though with his #2

 

I find this pretty ridiculous because SAT scores are taken in fucking high school. The math on it is a fucking joke (especially if you're in college with a STEM major) and the verbal section tests you on your knowledge of esoteric words that nobody uses or cares about. The way I see it, SAT is a lazy way for employers to filter out the application pool by using info from the distant past. It discriminates against people like me who didn't have their shit straight at age 16. But what can I say, I'm biased. I can also understand that if I had a stack of 1000 resumes for 10 positions where the job isn't exactly rocket science, I might get lazy and use any info I can to filter out applicants.

 

What is the general consensus on retaking the SAT as a college graduate? I had a decent math score, but English and writing can definitely improve. I want to work for MBB through grad school, so will a strong GMAT score replace a poor SAT score? Will employers know that I retook the SAT as a graduate, and if so, will that be a ding against me? Many things to consider here, but the SAT definitely matters in Consulting.

 

ACT writing and SAT writing are not similar at all... in fact I'd say the higher your ACT writing the worse of a writer you are, from what I've heard from kids who've taken both.

I hate victims who respect their executioners
 

So... apparently, certain PE shops have SAT score cutoffs. Are these cutoffs based on superscored (Best sections taken from multiple exams) or single sitting? I'm debating whether I should retake the SAT before I start college this fall, since my single sitting score sucks.

Array
 

Hate to say it and I think its ridiculous also since the SAT really isnt that great a measure of intelligence, but the truth is you will probably be asked about them at some point during some recruiting process. For MBB, you will be requested to include them on your resume. So unfortunately if youre going down that path it's one more thing that does get looked at.

 

The goal is to check your intelligence and make sure minority status or athletics wasnt your ticket into college. Only really low scores (sub 600 on a section) count, and then probably only a ding if combined with a fluff major and borderline gpa, as it probably means you are managing your academic record and it's likely to be inflated.

 
monkeyc:
The goal is to check your intelligence and make sure minority status or athletics wasnt your ticket into college. Only really low scores (sub 600 on a section) count, and then probably only a ding if combined with a fluff major and borderline gpa, as it probably means you are managing your academic record and it's likely to be inflated.

Not sure if you meant this in your reply or not, but in your reply it comes across as if getting into school as an athlete or a minority is a bad thing. I would say it is to make sure that athletics isn't your ONLY thing, rather than your ticket. Being an athlete in college can be a major plus to your resume.

As for whether or not it matters:

For some reason or another it does matter at certain firms. How much it matters depends on the firm. I have never worked somewhere where it was more than just a data point (similar to a grad school app, look at gpa, resume, SATs, etc)

 
theATL:
Not sure if you meant this in your reply or not, but in your reply it comes across as if getting into school as an athlete or a minority is a bad thing. I would say it is to make sure that athletics isn't your ONLY thing, rather than your ticket. Being an athlete in college can be a major plus to your resume.

It's much easier to hire the lacrosse player with a 1450 than it is to hire the football guy with an 1160.

 
International Pymp:
I think so long as you hit 700+ on every section you can show it... it shows you're a well-rounded person in terms of basic intellectual capacity

I love this post. So scoring 93rd percentile and above on each section shows that you have basic intelligence? If you believe that, then you are an idiot and I don't care if you got a 2400. There are numerous people in positions of power and influence--people who most likely have accomplished things that you are unlikely to reach--who didn't break 1300 or 1400.

Standardized tests primarily measure work ethic and socioeconomic backgrounds. People who study very hard score well and wealthy people use their financial muscle to buy test prep resources. In my high school, the people who ended up with the best scores began prepping in 9th and 10th grade. Some even started prepping for it in 7th grade.

There's a circularity involved. People who got high scores like to think that doing so makes them smart. After all, it can't be because they studied for it for a few years and their parents spent thousands on test prep. That would be bad for the ol' ego. So they look to hire other people who have high scores because "they're smart". In actuality, they hire them because people who have high scores tend to come from affluent areas and have personal networks full of successful people. For an industry like financial services, this background is important. Kids who grow up reading the WSJ and managing stocks that their parents gave them have a significant head start relative to their peers in understanding the business. In a client service business like IBD or relationship businesses like PE, networks are important. They make it easier to get deals done. Exhibit A is President Bush's former dogwalker who got into HBS without an undergraduate degree and now works at a pretty solid PE shop without any banking/consulting experience. http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2006/5/22/bushs-personal-aide-to-enro…. http://www.berkshirepartners.com/bio_gottesman.shtml

 

^first off: I didn't get a 2400, I got a 'normal' prep school -> ivy league type score, like 96th/97th percentile. Second of all, you are totally misunderstanding my point on this, and clearly you're getting a bit defensive.

What I said was that if you get 700 on all 3 sections you show you have basic / well-rounded intellecutal capacity. In other words, you cannot easily get the 700 on all 3 sections if you're an idiot - or at least I haven't seen it happen.... what I DID NOT WRITE is that if you DON'T get a 700 on all 3 sections then you ARE automatically in idiot / not well rounded... do you understand the difference? Perhaps if you read a bit more carefully in general, you'd be better at "critical reasoning"...

 

also for the record... i hardly studied at all for the exam before getting above 2200 on the SAT I + SATII writing (the equivalent of today's 2400), so don't assume we all had tutors all day and worked are asses off... I played 3 varsity sports constantly in high school and hardly ever spent time studying any subject.

 
International Pymp:
also for the record... i hardly studied at all for the exam before getting above 2200 on the SAT I + SATII writing (the equivalent of today's 2400), so don't assume we all had tutors all day and worked are asses off... I played 3 varsity sports constantly in high school and hardly ever spent time studying any subject.

Watch out guise, we got a badass over here

 

It depends on what your educational goals are. If you are planning to transfer to a school with lots of competition, then, your test score can be a determining factor when being compared to another student with a similar GPA. And I would assume, the same applies for job applications. Its shows you are going that extra mile to separate yourself from the competition.

 

think about it this way though- getting into an ivy league school really depends on what you did at 16 and the name of your school follows you around forever- at least in the finance industry which has a ton of snobs... my last interview I had to explain why I went to such and such school for undergrad, and I'm 30! One guy who screened analyst resumes at my prior employer would throw out any that didn't list a 1500+ on the SAT (before the 2400 scale).

ideating:
If you're a retard when you're 16, you're likely to be a retard now.
Perhaps, but there are plenty of highly intelligent people out there who blew off the SAT (and high school in general) because they didn't give a fuck, or didn't receive the proper direction from their parents. Most of these individuals remain dipshits their entire life, but some make the 180 and become highly successful.

I too think it's dumb that an intelligent, hard working individual with several years of work experience should have to list his SAT score on his resume.

 

Personally, I wouldn't want anyone with a sub-1300 score. At the very junior level, when all the analysts are doing grunt work, sheer aptitude won't matter a whole lot. But do you really want to groom someone who couldn't even get 2/3rds to 3/4ths of the questions of the SAT right? Come on, the SAT is full of algebra from middle school and "fill in the blank" type questions where half the answers are completely nonsensical. It's a test of APTITUDE, whereas the ACT is a test of how well you learned high school material. Of course, there are certain factors, but if you were a slacker in high school then you should have an outstanding GMAT or GRE to balance out your mediocre SAT score.

If I were more of a condescending douche I might even go as far saying that 1500 should be a cutoff for anyone past the associate level -- but that's a bit ludicrous. Long post short, it's like using CAPM to estimate the required return. They're both flawed in their own ways, but remain simple, effective ways to gauge a single metric.

 

It may be meant as a standard aptitude test but with the amount of kids spending 200+ hours in paid study groups, private tutors, paying students to take the test for them, I can assure you that it no longer serves that purpose.

 

I understand what you're saying but life isn't fair and the prep classes don't actually have an effect on test scores.

I tutor the SAT I for a major testing services company and let me tell you -- there are no "tricks", just straight practicing. Most kids won't remember anything you tell them when they get to the test so the best way to boost scores is to trap them in a room for 3 hours and force them to get better at taking the test. Some of the kids are well-off, but most of them are just your average kids. From my experience, it's PRACTICE that brings up test scores, not the actual prep classes themselves. Practice = success. Sound familiar? Obviously, like with everything else in life, the more aptitude you have, the less practice it takes. Life isn't fair, and I don't think any bank will buy the above argument.

If you find your SAT score to be such a detriment I would recommend that you take the GMAT. They're essentially the same type of test.

 

The SAT score should be used to screen. It's the one thing that will not help you, but can hurt you. No one cares if you got a 1550 instead of a 1400. But people sure will care if you got below a 1200.

There have been studies that have shown that it is nearly impossible to improve your score more than 120-140 points. Literally less than 2% do so. It is an exam based on REASONING ABILITY, and that is why it is hard to teach. There are tricks and time-management, test-taking strategies that will most certaintly help, but more often than not, it wont.

We immediately screen people that have scored below 1250. They don't even get to interview. My score is on the lower range of my peers. I got a 1330. 740M/590V. Maybe in the future the cut-off will be 1350, hopefully not!

 

So should I even put it down on my resume? I guess 1300 isn't that bad, but I was planning on taking the GMAT anyway before school is over, and on some practice tests I have scored above the 90% mark. Either way I still think it's pretty useless, even as a weeding out tool.

 
Trojans11:
so which banks screen SAT scores? I got exactly 1210. 710M/500V should I be worried?

Yes you should be a bit worried. It varies by office... When I worked in banking (NY office) we screened because we could...the LA office didn't care too much. It just depends. In consulting they REALLY care.

 

"There have been studies that have shown that it is nearly impossible to improve your score more than 120-140 points. Literally less than 2% do so. It is an exam based on REASONING ABILITY, and that is why it is hard to teach. There are tricks and time-management, test-taking strategies that will most certaintly help, but more often than not, it wont."

If someone didn't study/take the test seriously to begin with, they wouldn't have any trouble bringing up their score more than 140 points by studying. It's the people who have studied for months that top out and reach a point where what they score on a certain day is a fairly accurate predictor of their "real" score.

The SAT stopped being an "aptitude" test a long time ago. Since at least the early 90's the two original sections have been a test of vocabulary, algebra, and geometry. So, someone could be smart enough to reason the analogies, but if they didn't spend weeks memorizing the vocabulary words used for the questions, it wouldn't even matter. Anyone of above average intelligence can spend months memorizing a long list of words along with refining their 9th grade math skills to a point where they'd have no trouble getting a 1500+ on the SAT. (And if they want to score high on the writing section, all they need to do is write for length; it doesn't even matter if it's filled with factual errors.)

 

The last two places I interviewed for asked me for my math score, for what it's worth. I don't think it's a big deal but mine is still on my resume, but obviously if you don't think it's "good enough" then you don't have to put it. Or if you did particularly well on math maybe just put that...? I don't think it matters too much for most places.

I hate victims who respect their executioners
 

Ridiculous to me, but it seems like there are still people out there who care for whatever reason. Although not the exact same experience level, but looking to switch jobs a year or two out of school, I came across a decent amount of job postings asking for it and had one or two apps that specifically required it. I remember having to call up CollegeBoard because I couldn't remember the exact breakdown.

Array
 

You know, back when SAT equated to an IQ test of sorts and you could submit your score for entry to Mensa and that sort of thing, then I can see that. That was I think pre-'96? Don't quote me. But nowadays it just doesn't make sense. You went to college, you got a degree with X.X GPA, you've been in the field doing the work.... it just seems totally asinine to me. It'd be like asking me what my high school GPA was..... I don't know, who cares? I obviously did well enough to get into the right college and move forward from there, what does it matter? Then again there are plenty of firms that want your GMAT post MBA(through friends I've been told MBB consulting and some BB's) but even that I don't think is useful, but I'm not a consultant. Having taken the GMAT and actually gotten an MBA though I just don't see the relevancy. People get hung up on numbers and prestige. It's stupid. Especially in RE where we all know that soft skills are the best skills.

 

i've heard of this being asked for pre-mba BUT experienced hires in super-competitive areas like megafund PE where they're screening kids w 2 yrs i-banking experience. keep in mind they are looking at candidates who very well might have gotten like a 1570-1600 SAT. so if you are interviewing w a fund like Goldman's REPIA then it doesn't particularly surprise me (but i agree that it's incredibly douchey).

 

I have to wonder... what the hell does a 10 year old SAT score mean now that the SAT is out of 2400 as opposed to 1600. Not only that, what does it really matter? 4 years out of college should be irrelevant for the SAT scores.

 

It makes sense if you are expecting a large number of applicants. Just makes an easy way to filter some of undesirable candidates.

Follow the shit your fellow monkeys say @shitWSOsays Life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid - John Wayne
 

I think we can all agree on a number of items: 1) Asking for SAT scores for a position that also requires 5+ years of relevant work experience is obnoxious, 2) SAT scores are wildly imperfect as a predictor for intelligence, let alone ability to analyze/underwrite/transact on commercial real estate, 3) All other things equal, a candidate who got a 1400+ on his/her SAT is probably smarter than the candidate who got a 1000, 4) Asking for the score is an easy way to filter people who look similar on paper, and both passed a phone screen without saying anything stupid.

 

Lol love how this year old thread has been revived. I can confirm, even for pure CRE/Resi positions that ive seen at 'megafunds', that SAT scores are asked for and I would imagine that they matter to an extent.

I can also confirm (as I am sure that you all have seen for yourself) that I have met some of the smartest and also some of the dumbest people (on job) with really high SAT scores.

 

so long as your math score is above 700 you probably do not want to because the other sections are not really given that much weight in finance. In any situation it would not really be in your best interest to spend the time to retake them.

 

I worried about this myself when applying. I didn't take the SAT but took the ACT and scored very low despite the fact that I was able to get into a respected and solid semi-target university. My ACT was below 28 and very unimpressive, however I was able to get a FT IB offer from a MM in the end and found that many interviewers didn't really care that much, just were curious.

The way I spun it was asking why a test that I took four years ago had any bearing or relativity to my intelligence now. I said that I am a far more developed person intellectually and personally since my senior year of high school and I didn't think my score was an accurate display of my abilities. Many interviewers didn't have a good answer for me and most agreed.

Hope that helps

XX
 
Pike:
I worried about this myself when applying. I didn't take the SAT but took the ACT and scored very low despite the fact that I was able to get into a respected and solid semi-target university. My ACT was below 28 and very unimpressive, however I was able to get a FT IB offer from a MM in the end and found that many interviewers didn't really care that much, just were curious.

The way I spun it was asking why a test that I took four years ago had any bearing or relativity to my intelligence now. I said that I am a far more developed person intellectually and personally since my senior year of high school and I didn't think my score was an accurate display of my abilities. Many interviewers didn't have a good answer for me and most agreed.

Thanks for the input. Would you know if this would matter at a Bulge Bracket firm?

Hope that helps

 

Regarding your first question, I've noticed only a few banks ask for SAT score when you apply for internships. Those are normally big banks. If you want to go to a boutique bank, I doubt if they would ask for SAT. GPA would be much more important in either case. However, it never hurts to make yourself look more competitive if you have the time and resources.

 

Thanks everyone and no EPS I don't think so. I know people who have done it who weren't students. & by 'big banks do you mean bulge bracket banks baldmonkey? Will the SAT be relevant after I graduate when applying to full time jobs?

 
JamaicaFinance:

Thanks everyone and no EPS I don't think so. I know people who have done it who weren't students. & by 'big banks do you mean bulge bracket banks baldmonkey? Will the SAT be relevant after I graduate when applying to full time jobs?

You don't need to be a student to retake it (SAT tutors take it all the time).

Don't retake it. The time you spend on prepping for and taking the SAT can be spent in a far more productive manner, for example, networking or establishing a finance or business club at your school.

 

Nah the juniors going for SA positions now have not taken the expanded SAT, we took the regular math & verbal one. We were the cutoff year.

As for how much it matters, I don't think it's measured on par as GDP but higher is always better. I know all firms ask for it and some firms like D.E. Shaw ask even when you are an experienced applicant.

Not sure how much firms care about SAT II's (don't really understand why), but most people on this firm do not advocate you putting your SAT II on your resume unless you're applying for consulting. That being said, some firms still ask you for your SAT II's on the online application form.

 

Yeah I definitely agree that the SAT 2 Math II is much more difficult than the regular SAT Math, although none of the questions on any of the SAT tests ever get as hard as some of the brainteasers i've read here.

At any rate, it sounds like the SAT is just another yardstick, not really important as long as you don't suck, which can be good or bad (depending on how you did).

 

The reality is that it matters for some banks and some interviewers, but for others it does not. I know that Lehman put the most emphasis at of all of my interviews, as I did poorly and when it came up during 1st rounds, I was told that it may be an issue. Citi, CS, and JP never mentioned it

 

well first of all the sat is meant to be a predictor of performance in college. that said, it'd be rather secondary to even consider it as undergraduate gpa would be the most recent and relevant measurement of what the sat sets out to quantify.

 

to add, the SATs are very standardized whereas GPAs at individual schools are not. Think grade inflation/deflation can be misleading. Although it's not a perfect measaure, the SATs still measure everyone with the same yardstick.

I think colleges should disclose class rank. High schools do it and it would be alot easier to see where someone with a 3.5 stands. At some schools, a 3.5 may be very ordinary but at others a 3.5 would be great e.g. Chicago.

 

Unless you've done poorly (e.g. below what it would take to get into a target), I don't think it will come up during an interview. And even if it does, you can always find a way of explaining it away... "I wasn't as focused then but I've learned and have performed very well in college so far," basically just emphasize you're a hard worker and that should fix any SAT problems because banking is 99% hard work and 1% raw intelligence.

GPA definitely matters a lot more than SAT. Yes, there is grade inflation, it's not standardized, etc. etc. but it shows how well you performed over several years in an academic setting, which is a much better indicator of your work ethic than the SAT.

I've never heard of someone getting dinged because of an SAT score that was too low, but anything is possible I suppose. I wouldn't stress too much on this one.

 

It is real. I realize it's a BIT ridiculous, but I'm trying to rid my resume of the stigma that is "non target." It's a good school, but it doesn't get much lovin' from the big banks. I would like to end up at a big bank (and, subsequently, a big PE fund), and I know I need to do whatever I can to stand out. Someone suggested this as a possible way to do so, and that is why I brought it here.

b4f, PnL, thanks for the advice. I guess it is sort of a stupid idea, though it did sound great at first. It's not like it would really cost me anything - $45 to take it, a few hours on a Saturday morning, and I wouldn't need to prepare at all.

nygiants, I'll see what I can do. Thanks for the words of encouragement.

 
trailmix8:
worst idea ever

I'll preface by saying I don't disagree. It seemed great at first, but after thinking about it and reading the responses, it seems that it certainly is a terrible idea.

What's sort of funny about this is that the guy who suggested this is about to become a 3rd year analyst in Goldman's IBD. I guess that doesn't mean he's going to be full of good ideas, but you wouldn't think he'd be giving me the worst idea ever.

 
GoodBread:
I don't think your SAT scores have anything to do with the "stigma of a non-target." I went to a non-target, albeit a good one, and my SAT was solid. The point is, your GMAT dispels any fears that you don't have the quant or verbal chops. And a few hours not spent sleeping on a saturday morning is a big deal.

Ah, glad to hear that. Most people say the GMAT won't cover for the fact that I have "poor" SATs (I must digress; my SATs were probably top 3 or 4 in my high school class and are actually pretty solid. But when it comes to banking/PE, they are considered below average. Wonderful...) because firms believe SAT is a true indicator of intelligence, but GMATs can be studied for. But it's good to hear that is not true. Looks like I won't be the oldest guy in the room at SAT test day.

And nygiants, no worries. I've made my fair share of similar comments.

 

To be fair, I busted balls to get a 760. The first time I took it I got a 640 - that was with zero preparation. I looked at the test format and did a quick math review, but nothing else.

I bought the official guides and the Manhattan GMAT SC, studied for about six weeks (probably an hour or two a day), and took the test and nailed it. So it's not as sweet as prepping for a week and scoring a 760, but it's a 760.

 

I'm thinking about trying out for a local pee wee football team. I was pretty good back in the day, but now that I'm 6'3", 225, I think I could dominate. I did play college football, but I believe employers will be really impressed by a midget league MYP trophy. Plus, I could be team captain, and show people that I know how to lead the next generation of Americans.

 
joemontana:
I'm thinking about trying out for a local pee wee football team. I was pretty good back in the day, but now that I'm 6'3", 225, I think I could dominate. I did play college football, but I believe employers will be really impressed by a midget league MYP trophy. Plus, I could be team captain, and show people that I know how to lead the next generation of Americans.

How the hell did you play college football if the colleges recruiting you only had your Pee Wee football performance to base your skills off of? You must have been one fine Pee Wee football player.

Really though, thanks for your wonderful analogy. I'm thinking you're going to want to change local pee wee football team to local professional football team - makes it more relevant. And they'll have to base their decision off of film/skills from your Pee Wee days. Something tells me you don't have that great of a shot.

 

No - almost nobody cares about your SAT's when you start working. If they ever ask you about it, just be honest and confident about it, and that you got where you are today through hard work. After all, math in finance for the most part is straight up multiplying and dividing, and if you are getting really fancy you might see an exponent here or there. A 700+ in math is not a prereq for this industry.

Capitalist
 

Every hedge fund internship I apply for asks for SAT scores. If you don't ever want to leave banking then idk what you should do

"Look, you're my best friend, so don't take this the wrong way. In twenty years, if you're still livin' here, comin' over to my house to watch the Patriots games, still workin' construction, I'll fuckin' kill you. That's not a threat, that's a fact.
 

Retake it. There's no downside and a lot of people that I've met in banking care significantly about your scores (it's stupid but they do). If you ever want to jump to the buyside it will matter too, and. - 1200 can definitely put you out of thr running for alot of great PE and HF opps down thr road.

 

At what point are scores "sufficient" for HF/PE? 1300? 1400?

"When I was young I thought that money was the most important thing in life; now that I am old I know that it is." - Oscar Wilde "Seriously, psychology is for those with two x chromosomes." - RagnarDanneskjold
 

Gnome - if taking the SAT again will make you sleep better at night, then just go for it. But take a quick look at finance positions being advertised (whether through on campus channels or external recruiting sites), and you'll notice that they typically have a GPA threshold, but rarely (personally, I've never seen it, and I've applied to ER, IB, PE, and VC jobs) ask for SATs. I could see the question maybe popping up if you are an English major and the interviewer wants a benchmark to gauge your quantitative skills. But if you are taking quant heavy classes in college and performing well in them, then I don't see why the SAT would provide additional 'color' to your application in the professional world. Rather than study for the SAT, use that time to network with a few people in the industry to better position yourself for interviews. That's being wayy more productive.

Capitalist
 

Thanks, guys

I am sure and know it was a combo of things, Bearing. But I still believe my SAT's really did me in. I won't lie- Math portion was around 500/800. English wasn't much better. Like I said, I did not even open the prep book. And some of these firms specifically want those numbers when applying. At that point in my life I did not feel college was in my future. Since then, I have gone on to a CC and my best acceptance was into NYU, but I ended up finishing my BA at a lesser NYC area college. That was a mistake as well, since bigger name is probably always better. GPA was mediocre where I ended up going (3.2 overall, 3.4 finance).

I have an entrepreneurial background, but the work itself is low level. I don't want to give away too much since you never know who reads this. Right now, I am specifically looking at prop firms, which in all honestly is the one area I feel myself fitting and looking forward to work. I've applied to around 5, which is not a huge number, but I am mainly trying to look at the more reputable ones.

The GMAT is an interesting idea...Any other thoughts?

 

You have an unimpressive GPA from a non target and no finance related work experience. You can't change your resume, but you can probably improve the way it looks. Expand on your strong points and minimize your weak grades. Rearrange your resume.

And apply to MORE FIRMS! 5 is almost nothing, so don't start stressing out just yet.

 

Hey Getgo,

I did get it reviewed and improved by "Dosk" on here. He did a great job, but there is only so much one can do. I'd say we are semi-target, not that it matters.

The frustrating aspect is that I feel I have most of the qualities and characteristics of a good trader and I have noted them specifically in my cover letters w/ examples. But one thing I can't back up is "quantitative" since I did not take many math courses and bombed my SAT's. I did have the SAT question asked in an interview and I was just trying to think how to supplement my answer w/ some proof or backing that I am not a total idiot with numbers. But at that time I could think of nothing. Any advice for this? I have ran my business and kept all #'s yearly in excel, projections, etc. Took financial modeling where you have to be comfortable dealing w/ statements and their numbers. But these don't seem good enough, IMO.

My next step is looking into alumni since I know a few of them are working at some of these shops.

 

I still don't see the relevance of a HS test in determining job placement. The point is you graduated college got a BS/BA and are now entering the workforce. If anything, focus should be placed on college performance and GMAT, if anything.

This is just another stupid and infantile tactic utilized by investment bank recruiting. Talent development? Managerial potential? I think not.

These banks dont care about your personality/potential/ability to grow in the organization. Because if they did, such a stupid question and number would not matter.

 

I have the same problem - my SATs were good enough to get me into Penn/Wharton, but a lot of hedge funds I look at require 1500+ to even be considered (I'm still on the 1600 pt system)

I've thought about retaking them. My issue is that if the person put 2 and 2 together, they'd realize that given my age, my score should be on the 1600 pt scale instead of the 2400. Furthermore, I just think it'd be sort of dishonest, because college does teach you to think more conceptually (ie - I think I'd score a lot higher now). It wouldn't necessarily be lying, but it wouldn't be telling the whole truth.

My little bro is applying to college and taking it soon - maybe I'll take it with him, just for amusement.

 

Yanks I see that you don't understand the relevance of a HS test score (to be honest nor do I)... but the issue is that a lot of firms do use it as a barometer/cutoff much like GPA. I had very high SATs and was asked about it a lot, in fact some firms require it so I ended up just putting it on my resume outright. I didn't realize how much they cared about it until I started the recruiting process.

If you do take it again, I'd recommend just still using M+V, ignore the writing, to be honest no one cares about it and chances are they aren't going to go to the bother of looking up your score... and its not like you're making it up, its pretty common to ignore the writing score.

I would agree with the above posters that a smarter bet would probably be the GMAT, since it would be more relevant and also you would have it done if you ever considered grad school.

Jack: They’re all former investment bankers who were laid off from that economic crisis that Nancy Pelosi caused. They have zero real world skills, but God they work hard. -30 Rock
 

Thanks again for the advice.

I understand why they use it, albeit it sucks that it really is not indicative of how you currently stack up, IMO. A lot of people have different study habits from mid-HS compared to late college. It may be a test that indicates general aptitude, but you can certainly study for it (as is proven by the many books, pre courses, etc).

Anyways, I have to go over trade4's list and uncover some other NYC firms.

 

I asked a similar question just switch SAT with ACT... from what I remember it shouldn't hurt you too much, especially if you do good in school afterwards (sounds like you're doing damn good) and, if anything, you should just take the GMAT instead of retaking the SAT and put the GMAT on your resume. It also seems like most firms just have a minimum SAT score for a cutoff, so it shouldn't adversely affect you too much, if at all.

I think a 3.9 from an Ivy with quantitative classes should overshadow a sub-par SAT, that's just me though.

Some people are probably going to tell you to use the search function... and it's definitely useful with this type of question because there are quite a bit of threads that are pretty much the same thing.

If your dreams don't scare you, then they are not big enough. "There are two types of people in this world: People who say they pee in the shower, and dirty fucking liars."-Louis C.K.
 

The man said don't ask why. My guess is some hot chic said that she would bang him if he could get +2150. That's about all I can come up with for why you would take the fuckin SAT after college. Sir, if I were you, I would accept your 1850 score and bang a whore.

 

Thanks for the helpful and funny replies.

I am not looking to take a Princeton Review/Kaplan course cause they were not that helpful to me. I am looking to hire some 2400 genius (I don't care if he is younger than me) that can tell me his/her tricks in taking the test. I am not saying there is some magical formula in taking the test but I am sure there is some secret sauce.

My English has improved a lot during college and now I want to kill the SAT in one shot. I am willing to study my ass off for this.

So, the question is, do these kind of private tutors helpful? Anyone?

Any other advice is much appreciated as well.

 

i also did my ugrad in US and was an intnl. My verbal was higher than yours, but it comes down to memorizing vocabulary. You can push Verbal up like 100 pts by learning 500 new words. Since you have been in the U.S., your vocab is probably good anyways. I dont think there is any magical formula. You just have to spend 1 hr every night to learn 20 new words or smtg. When I was at hs, I could do it easily. I dont think I would be able to do it now though..

 

Vero odit itaque cumque aut ex at. Nemo aut accusamus voluptas exercitationem. Et veniam tenetur blanditiis eveniet atque.

Praesentium sunt quam impedit consequuntur pariatur. Amet voluptatem sed et consequatur dolorem laudantium adipisci. Ut dolor officiis excepturi ut quisquam autem omnis. Enim necessitatibus aut repellendus fugiat eos. Consequatur velit soluta excepturi perspiciatis at sed.

Non pariatur est sunt nemo ut ratione. Aliquam rerum et harum odio asperiores. Et quibusdam ad quia sapiente officia aut iste. Dolores dolorum ut voluptates voluptatem. Est qui in qui cumque qui beatae impedit. Ipsam deserunt laudantium ipsa beatae ut. Repellendus harum exercitationem ut beatae cum aut.

 

Sed et dolores nihil sunt voluptatem velit rerum quia. Dolorem culpa temporibus sapiente dolorem veritatis ex unde velit. Ipsa quaerat aut ad non repellendus voluptatem quia.

Molestiae reiciendis aut dolor sequi qui nostrum mollitia qui. Et molestias facere quis ut atque voluptatem. Nesciunt voluptas voluptas dolor blanditiis voluptatem consequatur. Ratione minima voluptatem quas in nemo sit ut.

Repellendus quae libero beatae est. Consequatur consequuntur praesentium eligendi rerum voluptatum eligendi. Voluptatem et est deleniti corrupti explicabo est exercitationem eveniet. Illum velit totam minus nulla fugit molestiae adipisci. Corporis omnis culpa aperiam dolore. Laborum aspernatur qui aspernatur suscipit magni eum.

Unde natus ad rerum maxime. Et consectetur ipsa veritatis qui.

 

Neque expedita consequatur temporibus ipsum aperiam. Non non nihil distinctio culpa dolores occaecati. Dolores consequuntur molestiae quia eos.

Itaque et explicabo sequi atque dolor expedita unde. Optio reprehenderit recusandae provident debitis adipisci aut ut ut. Incidunt sint fugiat quas maiores.

Voluptatem a et ut et dolores odit ducimus. Aspernatur consequuntur porro quia delectus maiores veritatis dolorem earum. Dolorum quis est unde reiciendis consequatur. Nemo sit dolore nulla aliquam. Reiciendis est rerum amet deleniti. Quis architecto iure ut.

Est similique sapiente ipsam quis eos eum. Et voluptates est quas fugit. Ea assumenda quis cumque ea in. Numquam nostrum provident voluptatem. Distinctio consequuntur culpa vitae. Explicabo velit qui nobis similique sapiente laborum voluptas dolorem. Temporibus et odio ratione nesciunt esse libero quasi.

 

Sit distinctio id quisquam nam nemo distinctio minima. Voluptas qui sed et placeat. Autem maiores illo et qui est est.

Quo quia omnis culpa quo non aut quasi sit. Quia et temporibus quaerat nesciunt voluptatem. Deserunt qui veritatis ut placeat dolor autem. Repellendus harum hic voluptas totam neque.

Nesciunt molestiae atque est eos aut. At et error voluptates nostrum reiciendis voluptate autem. Qui veniam consequatur rem et minima qui in.

 

Aliquid rerum ut dolorum laudantium. Minima laborum aut unde rerum animi quod aut. Atque voluptatem aliquid vitae. Incidunt aut eum corrupti iste. Culpa similique optio distinctio eum maiores aut a labore. Corporis voluptatum ipsa qui et qui quisquam.

Porro eligendi doloremque ea. Sunt deserunt alias ut expedita ab a. Eius explicabo possimus hic cumque aut perspiciatis. Qui eum omnis eum eum nisi modi.

 

Atque mollitia rem facere cumque nulla dolores sequi. Laboriosam voluptatum minus ipsa.

Tenetur consequuntur laborum et deleniti veniam perferendis doloribus. Sapiente dolores sed voluptatem aut atque aut eaque. Nobis ea doloremque maiores numquam voluptatibus sed.

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (202) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (144) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
6
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
7
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
8
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”