PPE vs Economics Path into IB in London

As a 17yo in the UK who wants to work in IB, would the path of doing purely economics be a better decision than going for PPE (ideally at Oxford). I would rather study PPE as i find the subjects more interesting but am unsure if I was rejected by oxford and LSE, whether PPE at Warwick or UCL would be a step down in terms of recruiting compared to its counter parts in economics at the same universities. I am confident I could make a good application for either paths with all 9s GCSE and 4a* predicted, but am wondering if the economics path would be safer to get into IB with the schools below. Furthermore, would a PPE degree's less quantitative nature be a disadvantage compared to pure economics when on the job in IB.

PPE: Oxford, LSE, UCL, Warwick 

Economics: Cambridge, LSE, UCL, Warwick, Imperial (EFDS)

Also, would Oxford PPE and LSE PPE be roughly equally as advantageous to an IB career as Cambridge LSE

16 Comments
 

Oxford PPE and Cambridge economics are comparable targets, but I suspect at lower targets like Warwick or UCL, economics would be slightly better than PPE. It would be interesting to hear whether any other PPE students from places like Durham or York have made it into Ib

 

We do not care what you studied in London. Economics at Cambridge vs PPE at Oxford is marginal.

1) Be smart
2) Ideally be interesting (LSE finance kids are not interesting)

It is such a shame that a brilliant course like Oxford is being passed over because it is not "quantitative". IB is not quantitative, we at most do addition and multiplication in a spreadsheet. Studying and writing essays on the great books is far more valuable than doing DCF models — both for your career and for your life.

 
Most Helpful

University over course, first. Whatever the course is (within reason) focus on getting Ox/Cam/LSE if at all possible.

Within Ox/Cam, Econ at one versus PPE won’t make a huge difference. LSE is a bit more course sensitive.

Do not under any circumstances sacrifice an Oxbridge place for a Warwick one. And do not forget that Ox/Cam/LSE >>> UCL/WW >>>>>>>>>> [pretty much fucked]

 

I can only give you my single (biased) opinion, but I often think of LSE as a factory for finance tryhards.

On that basis I find LSE kids getting judged against the cookie cutter profile - perfect course, experience, clubs, whatever.

To that end I might view a non-finance or at least Econ degree as odd yes. Then again it’s still LSE so…

 

LSE probably still wins ceteris paribus, but I suppose you’re starting to get to the edge case where a UCL/WW candidate with great experience takes the lead.

For one, that tells you the advantage that targets have. Second, the thing with targets is that they’re a self-fulfilling cycle and it’s almost a falsehood to compare them like this.

If you go to LSE you get better exposure, experience, and support for finance than at the other schools. So, it’s somewhat likely that will end up with the better university *and* CV overall.

Either way, I’m not a huge fan of talking about universities like trading cards. Targets have a huge advantage, semi-targets have a fair chance, non-targets are largely NGMI without at least a Big 4 detour or similar. Yes if you’re at a semi and you do the perfect course and get great experience you can compete with targets. But also yes, targets have a lower requirement for experience because the brand name does more talking. There is also massive variance in individual screener preferences, criteria, hiring needs, which side of the bed they woke up on that morning… etc

Just get to a target if you can, a semi if you can’t, know that you’re potentially making your life a bit harder if you take a really odd course, but that you can make up for it and if you thrive better for it then power to you. These what ifs often become contrived

 

Oh, one other thing. If you do history at LSE your greatest competition isn’t the Econ/Finance student at UCL, it’s the Econ/Finance student at LSE.

This always seems to get forgotten, you’re up against your peers within your own university as much as from others. Offers/places aren’t infinite.

Notably, your next greatest competition after your peers at LSE are those at Oxbridge, not just UCL.

 

it all depends on the course but Ox/Cam/LSE > UCL/W > Others, as someone else said

that being said, it depends on the course. studying classics at Cam is less competitive than Econ at LSE I'd say, while History or IR at LSE is less competitive than PPE at Ox or STEM at Ox and Cam. The difference is marginal and plenty of people from all degrees from the top 3 get into finance. 

I would prioritise just getting in (ideally not to a classics/geography type degree) to Oxbridge/LSE, but once you're in really try getting your foot in the door. The best ways? Clubs, languages (if your uni offers outside language courses!), stock pitch competitions, and going to events. 

Once you do enough OAs and SJTs you can basically guarantee a 90% pass rate so also just learn how to pass those. Part of it is trial and failure but it's one of those things. 

note: the benefit of a 4 year degree is very high (if you can afford it), because it gives you an extra chance to recruit for summers/springs! This applies to lots of STEM (eg biochem at Ox) degrees and PPE at LSE

 

Oxbridge brand trumps all, I think something to consider that hasn't been mentioned here is time spent on course can sometimes make or break an application cycle. I noticed a lot of oxbridge ppl on courses with low contact hours (landec @ cam, ppe @ ox) tended to outperform STEM students/ even econs at cam especially. 

Oxbridge is hard and breaking into IB is harder, you might as well play the course game strategically and give yourself enough of a bandwith to take applications seriously. Best of luck!

monke see monke do
 

Pariatur illum sint dolores corrupti quidem magnam. Et omnis nobis et voluptatem corrupti. Impedit illum rerum quisquam dolor voluptatem voluptatum. Consectetur odio assumenda vero voluptatem.

Adipisci veritatis dolor dignissimos accusantium accusamus. Ea fugiat asperiores saepe ducimus quas ut autem. Eos placeat veritatis ut voluptatem. Aut consectetur corrupti quis minus autem quas sint. Repellendus enim doloremque vel et non autem.

Repudiandae sint dolore molestias reiciendis ipsum sunt voluptates. Aperiam aut occaecati inventore itaque quia itaque qui. Id fugiat eaque beatae quibusdam ea placeat quis. Sed aliquam sint vel libero magnam. Consequatur a et consequatur occaecati.

Career Advancement Opportunities

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.5%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 01 97.8%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.3%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.5%
  • Morgan Stanley 02 98.9%
  • Evercore 01 98.4%
  • Banco Santander 02 97.8%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.3%

Professional Growth Opportunities

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.5%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.9%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 98.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 01 97.8%
  • JPMorgan No 97.3%

Total Avg Compensation

September 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (16) $429
  • Associates (51) $260
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (26) $182
  • Intern/Summer Associate (14) $159
  • 1st Year Analyst (84) $151
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (76) $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
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
4
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
5
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
6
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
9
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
10
Linda Abraham's picture
Linda Abraham
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...”