Moderator Note (Andy): Best of WSO - this post originally went up March 2007 and we thought it deserved to go back on the homepage for those who may have never seen it.
I made the mistake of taking difficult courses much earlier and in a shorter timeframe than other kids, and I'm paying for it with an average GPA and very few internships. In short, if you have any doubts whether you can get an A/A- in all your classes in a given semester, make your schedule easier. The banks don't care what you take as long as your GPA is high. Sadly this is true for all banks and all areas.
+2
It's not only about your GPA, it's also about your educational background and knowledge. With easy classes, your GPA will be high, but you won't have important financial and quant skills (as those classes are usually most difficult). Why to study at all if you don't plan to take maximum out of your education?
yea honestly the type of math/finance you need to know to get a banking job is by no means anywhere close to what you are making it out to be. you don't even need to have taken difficult math/finance classes to know the shit in the vault guide.
i know people who are engineering majors (considered one of the most difficult majors)at my school with low 3's for their GPA who got numerous banking offers. i think banks understand that different majors have different average GPAs.
Ivan, the kid probably doesn't want to be a quant anyway.
"Producing in an investment bank was less a matter of skill and more a matter of intangibles - flair, persistence, and luck."
life is probably unfair... choose easy courses and choose an easy field of study such as history...don't make that mistake again
but in most cases they don't care for your gpa, they just need to like you
Here's something a lot of people I know did:
take an easy major (history, english) take a few econ and math classes pass/fail
Then in cover letters they always said they took math and econ the please their parents, but then developed a love for it, blah blah blah
BTW you have to be at a target school for this to work, otherwise you're screwed.
Yeah guys I can really relate!
I ended up with a 3.1 in chemical engineering, and I kick myself every day for it!
Because you know what? No one liked to hear excuses! I was still in the top 3rd of my class, and frankly they don't give a rat's ass......which really sucks because you just sit there, seething, knowing that they were an econ major and have no clue how hard your classes were.
It makes sense though, I mean, who wants to go to a doctor who got B's and C's?
I could have picked a tough major (business for example) that still would have been a walk in the park compared to chemE and ended up far better off.
If you start getting B's and a few C's, run like hell!
Oh well.....I do have a cool ring on my pinky and I can put the letters PE after my name....
As most of you already know, bankers are "results driven." (feel free to use that term newbies as part of your behavioral interview personal description)
At the end of the day, I don't want excuses. I'm not taking the class with you, so I can't judge the level of difficulty and frankly I don't give a fuck. Get A's. End of Story.
That way AFTER you get the job, although you may be lacking in your developing knowledge and application skills, prove to be a fast learner and choose to challenge yourself at that point in your career where no single letter will be permanently adjoined to your perceived performance capabilities. (Until your annual review. In which case you now get a number. lol)
Agreed. Most IBers I know run scared from any course that has any kind of math in it to preserve their GPA.
Take the hard courses you want to take because they challenge you. Fill in your extra course space with easier classes you know you can do well in. This way you can average out a nice GPA around 3.5.
I have a joint honours degree from my school. It involves advanced economic theory which is the same course as first year grad students in econ take. It is a great degree to have, but I can never get above a B+. So I took some other courses that interested me and were much easier.
Work out a balance. The worst thing you can do is go through school taking easy classes and feel like you did nothing with your 4 years. It will come to bite you in the ass later on if you get any advanced degrees. I mean why go to college...just to get the job. That is incredibly shortsighted of you.
Just an idea.
I agree with the post above that said life is not fair - go easy.
Just take the easiest classes that fulfill your degree and if you are really committed and want to challenge yourself then do a ton of independent study. You can learn anything you want by simply picking up a book.
The GPA will get you the interview and the independent study will nail the offer.
Hard work, luck, AND strategy are what gets the offer. Play your cards right.
Your conclusion that international students are "MUCH stronger analysts than those aforementioned U.S. Ivy school grads, who were choosing easy classes on their way to maximizing GPA." is fundamentally flawed and biased. Specifically, you fail to take into account that pretty much all of the best international students study in elite U.S. universities. Therefore, graduating with "High Honors" from your international universities is not all that difficult and fairly meaningless. If any of those kids came over to an elite Ivy league university and attempted to take on incredibly tough courseloads, they would quickly get poor grades and realize the folly of their ways. They would be competing against the world's best, rather than some random kids who weren't good enough to get a scholarship to Yale or Stanford or whatever. You can call it a "loser" strategy or whatever you want, but quite frankly natural intelligence and ability matters a hell of a lot more than working full-time your senior year or getting a Master's or whatever it is exactly that you think is the way to go. There's a reason why the captains of industry are heavily weighted towards Ivy league schools and not some podunk university in Germany or wherever you went to school.
You obviously don't know much about how the system works in Europe. I'm from Northern Europe and even though we're generally wealthy and well educated, not too many people would ever consider Ivy League schools because they're so far away from here and there isn't a need for that. In many parts of continental Europe you actually don't pay anything or less than 5 000 USD per year to study even when doing a Master's degree. The local schools recruit best people from the country and have lots of very smart and motivated students.
From those top schools you can still go to London and do IBD in MS/GS/JPM if you put the effort like you would put in an Ivy league school. So how much better do you have to be a "office politics" that choosing an Ivy league school would have a positive NPV? Probably it would only make sense if you get a scholarship and/or if you're sure you want to work in a PE or a HF straight out of undergrad.
Also, in many European schools graduating with high honors is not something that happens all the time. They may have a specific GPA limit and if no one is above that no one receives honors. The grading in some countries, for example, the Netherlands is not inflated at all as it is in the US so something like 80% / B may be top of class.
Some of the students do go to Oxbridge but even they are a vast minority of all top students who would potentially get accepted.
Ok, ok, as you wish :) The only thing I wonder is how do you measure this specific "natural intelligence and ability" which matters that much?
If via stuff like gmat scores (for natural intelligence), then it's hardly that much in Ivy grads favor (720+ GMAT is pretty common here among top students - BB IBD analysts, even given the fact that English is not a mother tongue).
If via different means (especially for ability), please enlighten (apart from the really difficult and finance-related CFA program exams, its hard to find anything which doesn't depend on the country of presence, puts everyone under same conditions and allows to measure ability - but only a few of those in investment banking usually pursue this designation, so we do not have a large enough sample to make conclusions).
Yea, and one more thing to think about: if top graduates here were of a sub-par quality compared to Ivy's, how could you explain why base salaries and bonuses for I-bankers in local offices of BB banks are more or less of the NY level? After-tax income is usually higher, thanks to tax rates
How does a pass/fail class look? I've never gotten a B yet on my transcript, and I think I'm getting one in a stats class (not directly related to my econ/math major). I'm debating whether to pass/fail it, or just leave it on my transcript (I have ~A gpa now). Does the pass/fail matter that much? WIll they think I did even worse? Granted, I have never pass/failed a course before...
Pass fail it... you aren't applying to med school. At least with all my interviews for SA this year the only reason they know your GPA is from the number on your resume. No one asked for transcripts or anything. They just see the number and that's it.
what about bschool? i heard from someone that top tier b schools require a letter from a prof asking for the letter grade of a pass/failed course. is that true? sounds bogus to me
I'd say take the easy class route, but to an extent. I may have a slightly different situation since I'm in a specialized school (Wharton), but I was definitely asked about whether I'd taken specific finance classes in my interviews. And I think it'd look terrible if you'd only taken the easy ones and not any of the difficult, but relevant ones like Corporate Valuation or Advanced corporate finance.
Since you'll usually be interviewing with an alum of your school, and if you have a common major (like econ), they may very well ask you about what classes you've taken. While I don't think you need to have taken notoriously extremely difficult classes, if you've completely avoided stat, econometrics, or anything tricky in favor of notoriously easy econ classes, that would look bad.
I did interview with one firm (top boutique) and they actually had my transcript right there and asked me why I didn't get an A (versus an A-) in a few classes. So, I think they would've been alarmed if I hadn't taken any relevant courses. But that's certainly the exception not the rule.
So, yes, take easy classes, especially for your electives. Because it's usually just the GPA number that banks look at. And I'd second the comment about being able to learn later in life or outside of the college classroom. I personally love history classes, but am a terrible writer. Instead of taking a bunch of history classes and earning B's, I've read biographies of foreign leaders and books about Russia, Thailand, etc.
When I refer to "natural intelligence", I'm talking about two separate components. First, as you point out, is the ability to excel on standardized tests, as you point out - GMAT, SAT whatever. On this metric, I'm sure there are some international schools where the students score similar to Ivy league students.
The second component, I would argue, is perhaps more important than the first, and is measured by one's ability to "play the game." What do I mean by this, you might ask. Well, "playing the game" generally refers to figuring out the most expedient path to future success and doing everything possible to put yourself on that path. Some people here in the U.S. argue that there are many non-target school students who are just as qualified as Ivy league students to enter ibanking. This is true to some degree, insomuch as there are probably a few students at each non-target who have similar test scores to Ivy league students. However, the key point is that the reason that they are at non-targets is that they did not know how to "play the game" to get into Ivies in the first place. Unlike in many international schools, getting into an Ivy is not purely based on test scores, but is based on really being a well-rounded individual who will enhance the college experience of his classmates (please see Jian Li, a Yale freshman, if you think otherwise). Now whether or not a given individual will enhance the college experience of his classmates is relatively irrelevant for entrance; rather, the important thing is convincing the admissions office that you will. This is done by participating in extracurriculars, getting good recommendations etc. - all stuff Jian Li likely failed to do.
Returning to the original point, then, intelligence is composed partly of test scores and partly of the ability to "play the game." While many of your international students may be equally as strong as Ivy league students in natural test-score intelligence, I would argue that Ivy league students are better at seeing how the system works and using that system to their advantage. Indeed this largely explains the attitude of trying to get a 3.7 in easy classes rather than a 3.0 in difficult classes: while one probably learns more doing the latter, taking the hard classes hurts your chances of getting into a bank. Thus, while it may be admirable to work hard, the fact that you are doing so suggests that you do not recognize how the system works.
Finally, how does this relate to how good an analyst you are? Well, I think it's quite clear that your success as an analyst is partly due to your analytical skills, but not entirely. The analyst who works incredibly hard on a model but does not make it a point to let everyone know that this was his hard work is not likely to advance as quickly as the analyst who makes it a point to get recognized for his work. While I suppose you could argue that in terms of overall utility to the firm, a incredibly hard-working analyst with lots of work experience as you describe might produce more for the firm. But ultimately, I don't think it matters very much for promotion. That is why graduates of elite American colleges generally run all of the banks - the fact that they got into an Ivy or other elite institution in the first place suggests that they are both book intelligent and know "how to play the game", and these traits obviously stuck with them during their rise in the corporate world.
True for all areas? I'd like to see someone get into a structuring/quant role after having taken the "easy" subjects.
My school prints the median gpa for the class next to my gpa for the class. Will it look bad if I take a lot of classes that have medians of A and A+?
Damn, I hate schools which give A+ grades, wtf.. does that mean you get a 4.3 for it? That def skews GPAs, if feel if that was there at my school H/Y/P/S, eveyone's GPA would on average increase by at least 0.2 (assuming the A+ bracket is smaller than an equivalent A) and I would be ballin..
Honestly, this applies both to applying to schools as well as applying to jobs.
Never take a class if you can't get an A in it. Grades are vastly more important than class content.
I took hard AP classes in high school, did halfway decent, and didn't go to nearly as good a school as the kids who coasted by getting A's in grade-level courses and never getting beyond Algebra II in High School. Take the easy courses and ace them, do real learning on your own time.
I commend you on your honesty. He is right.
Ivan, are you from India?
Honestly, if you are at a HYPS type target then as long as you have a decent GPA from a real tough major you are fine. If you are from a non-target then your GPA would be scrutinized a lot more even if you are in a tough major. So, you might as well take easy classes and get as high a GPA as possible.
You could graduate with a 4.0 having gone through lots of easy classes, but then it catches up to you - when it comes down to interviews - you may be able to bs your way through first stage, but when you interview, you're screwed.
As the saying goes, it's investment banking...not rocket science. You don't need the toughest classes to ace the technical part of these interviews.
I just enjoyed reading through the post..and right, you just take everything easy.:)
I'm doing a triple major with econ, math and french, and im also doing an honors major for econ and im in the honors program in my school, which happens to be non-target. Ill probably end up with a 3.8-3.9 GPA. is that a good gpa, or should i maybe drop one of my majors?
Yes it is true that you want to keep a high GPA.
But I'd recommend the following, 1. Try to keep your gpa at or above 3.8. 2. Take the calc 1-3, linear algebra, differential equations math sequence 3. Learn a programming language: C++ (2 courses)
By taking the math/programming, you have the option for a MS in Finance. And we all know how competitive banking is, so you might want an MS Finance to get into some other role like quant research/trading/developing, all which pay very well.
It's good to have easy classes and doing great. If we feel depressed or stressed by having hard classes then we lose our concentration and that's not good for a student because concentration is much important to study.
Hard Classes worth it? (Originally Posted: 12/10/2012)
In terms of learning, preparation and exit opps for wall street is it better to maintain a 3.7GPA with lots of challenging/interesting upper level math and accounting classes or is it better to have a 3.9 with easy/bs classes where you don't learn anything? I'm choosing classes for next semester and currently I've loaded up with finance and math - to the point where I feel like a 3.5-3.7 is given. I know for grad school, they care more about your coursework and test scores than having the 3.9 gpa just because of how some kids major in communicaton or whatever and cruise through. I get 4.0's easily through standard business classes, but as I am interested in learning I would be okay taking a very rigorous courseload in terms of the time commitment, effort required, etc. I just wanted to get your thoughts on how having taken lots of "difficult" classes in your relevant courses listing (including a bunch of MBA classes) helps/impresses consultants, and ER/HF hiring managers and also grad school admissions adcoms (for operations research or Econ/finance PHD & for MBA).
College isn't about learning. Take the 3.9 and use the extra time to network and have fun with friends.
I second this. Pretty much the only people who will tell you otherwise are pensioned uni profs.
Thank god for people like you. It's attitudes like this that allow people like me to appear to be light years ahead of the other analysts, simply based on my ability to understand basic regression analysis and linear algebra.
If you're seriously considering an econ/finance phd, you will need both tough coursework and a high gpa. A 3.6 is simply unlikely to cut it, even with As in real analysis and probability theory.
Are there any critical classes to take despite difficulty though? Where does the buck stop is what I'm asking, are calc II, linear algebra, Intermediate accounting 1/2, advanced corporate finance, capital markets, foreign languages (German/french) all not worth it? I'd like to take Calc II and Corp finance 2 (advanced) at least, but neither are required for a degree (only calc I which I'm in the B+/A- range and corp finance for which an A is definitely possible)
Love of learning is great and all but your GPA will stick with you for quite a while after you graduate. Take the 3.9 and just read a book.
I think short term no, but long term yes.
Hard classes worth it? No. Get the 3.9, FT offer and use Khan Academy for the rest. Many youtube lectures out there you can watch for free if you got an hour or so to kill.
My honest opinion is that most of those standard business classes are pretty much worthless and you are buying your program's name on a diploma. The best class I have ever taken (including Phd classes) was an intro to real analysis. I also found Calc three one of the most rewarding courses. While I certainly am not taking integrals or applying the separating hyperplane theory on a daily basis, these classes really taught me how to think and solve those complex and ill-structured problems.
When I was an undergrad, my business honors program (I wound up studying economics in the undergrad business school) took a trip to New York. We met this crazy former Rhodes scholar that had gone to my school (a small, unknown liberal arts school in the south) that was now a trader at ML. First thing he asked was how many people were interested in a career on wall street. Pretty much all 30 of us raised our hands. His next question was how many people either had taken or plan to take Calc 1/2/3 and at least linear algebra. I was the only person to raise my hand. He considered this the "bare minimum". True story, but don't know how truthful he is.
One thing I can add for sure... if you're interested in an Econ PhD at any decent program, you're gonna need to at least have Calc 1/2/3 and linear algebra to even be considered. Most program expect some sort of real analysis or DiffEq. Otherwise you're gonna spend two years of your life in a terminal MA program and hopefully then apply to a decent PhD program.
I chose the classes that interested me the most, regardless of difficulty. Had some of the hardest finance classes but I don't regret any of them. I just couldn't stand taking one more of those bullshit marketing or general management classes..
let's be honest no finance class is hard :P
I can see what people are saying about the high GPA, but I really think learning how to solve tough problems in my upper level CS classes (OS, algorithms I, networking, etc) helped me shine in interviews. so there's that.
Good thing I read this thread. Time to shift the schedule around. Especially at a non-target...
This thread represents everything I hate about higher education and the corporate world. For graduate programs and jobs that actually require skills and/or talent (eg. quant, programming, etc), hard courses definitely help. For other jobs that care more about your cock-sucking abilities than your actual intellect (eg. investment banking, consulting), your courses don't really matter.
Personally I always hated people who took bullshit courses just for the sake of boosting their GPA, but depending on what you want to do it can definitely make sense. Just make sure you prepare for interviews and learn whatever you need to know in your spare time.
Take a few hard courses like quant/ algos & datastructures/ Databases/econ. You paid good money, might as well learn something and pick up some skills that you can carry out. Always make sure you take a battery of semi BS easy courses to boost your GPA, and to help you get some drinking time.
Networking is just one aspect, college should help you build skill sets.
A 3.9 is really tough to get though while taking any so called "hard classes" unless your prodigious at math and double math/econ or math/physics or perhaps chem/biology or other similar combinations. But for someone ONLY talented in say biology or econ without the math background to make an easy transition to a subject like econometrics/physics then the amount of work to get the 3.9 will cancel out time for time at the bar, frats, intramurals, etc (if you're interning, networking, in a couple of clubs and going to one party/social event per week)
What can I say? it's a pain, but the sacrifice is well worth it. Crack open a couple of beers when you are done studying at 2 am.
Not worth it unless you're entering a field that will actually value your quant skills. Pick the easy route and never look back. Ceteris Paribus, I will always prefere the candidate with higher GPA. Couldn't care less what classes one took so long as they can answer my qs in the interview.
~Guy who went to a preftigious school, cruised to a preftigious 3.9 GPA and now works at one of the most preftigious buyside funds
Do you factor in major? What about majoring in some bs subject like management/international business while proving interest in finance via relevent courses and 3-4 finance internships?
Is it okay to take EASY classes first semester? (Junior transfer) (Originally Posted: 05/27/2013)
I recently transferred to a semi-target/target school and during the first semester I am trying to take very easy courses: 12 hours, 1 econ class, and 3 easy liberal arts requirements. More than likely I should be able to pull a 3.7+ GPA.
I hope to use the extra time for networking/attending recruiting events/acclimating myself to the campus. That said, would my relatively easy courseload be disadvantageous? At my last school, I was already pretty ahead and took many courses as a sophomore that a first semesters junior would take.
Will this in any way look bad during summer analyst recruiting?
have you taken some accounting or finance courses yet? It would probably be good to at least have a couple under your belt for recruiting
I would take some accounting and finance courses and then load the rest with easy electives. It also helps to have an interesting non-finance class to talk about during an interview, if the topic ever came up.
I have already taken financial accounting, business finance, intermediate microeconomics, statistics 1 & 2.
Honestly, it's ok to take ALL easy classes in your situation. Everything that you need to learn for a finance interview can be learned on your own time (which is much more efficient, anyway). I honestly regret not taking easier classes in college to boost my GPA. Your time is definitely better spent on networking.
^ you can learn everything you need on your own time through the M&I and other interview guides
yeah its ok.. as long as you can tell the interviewer that you have done financial accounting and basic finance courses you should be ok.
i would take as much easy classes and get that GPA up..
Quia enim alias voluptatem modi sed. Cum aut sint et provident voluptas earum. Aut et quibusdam suscipit enim maiores sed. Provident maxime eveniet facere repudiandae pariatur.
Voluptatum necessitatibus ea voluptas eaque. Voluptas commodi nam eaque temporibus nihil. Repellat molestiae fugit eos natus dolore sit doloremque.
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...
Porro aliquid quia eaque id rerum. Corporis dolores quis provident sit ea animi. Non dolor et molestiae optio cupiditate temporibus. Asperiores aut et reprehenderit illo ut. Sint qui aspernatur est quia enim.
Nemo odio nostrum officiis et rerum qui tempore. Consequatur cumque pariatur consequatur. Reiciendis ea unde qui aut. Dignissimos cumque asperiores vitae consequatur ut eaque. Numquam aut doloribus aspernatur voluptas.
Et deserunt labore cupiditate. Dicta doloribus voluptatem molestiae quos commodi. Et sit dolor cumque occaecati doloremque nihil tempore. Est perferendis esse quo qui quia occaecati.
Ut impedit id eius est nihil molestiae quos. Qui commodi optio rerum occaecati.
Cumque vel reiciendis qui et minus aspernatur itaque quae. Sint cumque quaerat nisi nemo iste est sapiente. Voluptas ut quo quia. Voluptatem ad excepturi eos aut adipisci. Magnam unde ut illum quis.
Consequatur rerum ut et ut. Pariatur illo voluptatum et molestiae corrupti molestiae. Consequuntur veniam reiciendis veniam laboriosam dolor aut sed quis.
Vel cum dolor rerum numquam ipsa. Et nobis aperiam distinctio veniam nihil et est. Impedit voluptatem neque reiciendis necessitatibus fugit ut aut illum. Quibusdam vel labore sunt consequatur soluta ab.
Tempora recusandae temporibus tenetur. Aperiam magnam quisquam sed sit asperiores id aspernatur voluptatem. Iure quasi alias dolor veritatis eveniet. Rerum tempore quam commodi illo atque quis.
Perspiciatis debitis nihil sint laborum ullam aperiam. Sed sed architecto soluta optio soluta eveniet. Dolore et perferendis nihil reprehenderit. Culpa consequuntur ut suscipit voluptates.
Voluptatem aut est explicabo odio harum est. Et et suscipit omnis quas nisi. Perferendis exercitationem et id assumenda. Voluptatem aliquam aspernatur consequatur molestiae.
Inventore maxime provident provident quas iure rerum ipsam sed. Saepe est ipsa optio ea. Animi deleniti voluptatum alias rem non. Consequuntur in ullam laudantium totam qui dolorem.