31 Comments
 

not to sound dumb or anything...but the best answer is to believe in yourself..

self belief counts more than how low your gpa is..gl

 

Stern's a target. Make sure that it's 3.5 or above (not 3.49), and it won't matter. From that point on, it will be all about the rest of the stuff on your resume. Blackrock is good because it shows interest. Make sure your resume also includes significant leadership skills and you'll get yourself an interview. From the point that you get an interview, your resume barely matters.

 
Best Response

I exaggerated a little with the 3.49 instead of 3.5, it is usually ok to round up with that small of a difference. 3.5 is important because it's usually used as a "no-questions" cut off. Above 3.5 means you've tried, done fairly well. When comparing 2 GPAs above 3.5, you're essentially comparing which GPA is MORE extraordinary. Just make sure your resume GPA is not below 3.5.

edit: Keep in mind, this is from information that I've gathered over the last year about the recruiting process. I will go through the recruiting process this coming fall (for a summer analyst position). So it may not be exactly right. However, because of the format with the different banks, no one can tell you EXACTLY what the recruiting process is. They will usually give you an idea of the process which is somewhere in the middle of the range of recruiting processes.

 

Does it matter whether 3.5 is good enough or not? If I tell you you're fucked, is that going to change your mind about banking?

In any case...you're fucked, don't even try.

 

IMO, the only reason the Stern curve is infamous is because Stern often tries to compare itself with the higher ranked schools, particularly the Ivys. Most of the Ivys have a curve that is slightly above a natural bell (t-distribution). I'm not discussing the reason for that.

However, most of the average and lower schools have a grade distribution that is closer to the normal distribution. Stern's distribution being around the normal, combined with the perception of a "ivey league type" of school gives most people the notion that it is a very strict, and tough curve.

That's just my opinion, and theory as to the perception of a strict curve. It's open to the normal round of flaming that goes on around here.

 

The "Stern curve" theory is probably most likely perpetuated by disgruntled stern students who weren't the top five or six guys in class who got the coveted "A".

This anger is perpetuated by the fact that regular NYU gives out "A's" like candy.

 

" Stern is comparable to Ivys."

Ivy's tend to award bloated grades.

The overwhelming majority of Stern students have GPA's in the 2.7-to 3.3 range by the end of senior year, and the top bracket the rest.

 

It's 15% A's/A-'s if I remember correctly. The problem that most stern students had was that nearly the whole class was in the B+/B/B- range.

 

USC Marshall had a similiar curve. The Average GPA for undergrad business was 2.85, B/B- Average. Only top 10-15% received A/A- while the majority of the students receive a B-/B/B+.
However, now it's getting a little better with the average grade now stands as a 3.0. Most students thought the curve was a little unfair, but I think it prepares you for the competitive atmosphere of the real world. What is stern's average?

 

does suck.. when A is given to top 5%, and A- for 10% after. so if there are 50 kids in class, 2-3 gets A, and 5 kids get A-.

i'd say avg gpa is around 3.0 to 3.2

 

does suck.. when A is given to top 5%, and A- for 10% after. so if there are 50 kids in class, 2-3 gets A, and 5 kids get A-.

i'd say avg gpa is around 3.0 to 3.2

 

i think it is the school's responsibility to give out A's with serious discretion. Think about it, if everyone gets A's then these kids are going to REALLY believe that they are great at something that they're not. Consequently, it is going to hurt them down the road when they face real challenges and unable to prevail. It's important for college students to test the limits and discover their strengths and weaknesses. Not everyone has the thought process for finance and investment banking. Some are pushed to do finance because their parents want them to become investment bankers.

 

i think it is the school's responsibility to give out A's with serious discretion. Think about it, if everyone gets A's then these kids are going to REALLY believe that they are great at something that they're not. Consequently, it is going to hurt them down the road when they face real challenges and unable to prevail. It's important for college students to test the limits and discover their strengths and weaknesses. Not everyone has the thought process for finance and investment banking. Some are pushed to do finance because their parents want them to become investment bankers.

 

You guys shouldn't complain that much about the curve. Just come to the top schools in China, say, Peking or UIBE, I would say, a 3.5 GPA in finance is pretty good enough on resume......

 

How did this thread that ended 6 months ago pop back up last week? Whoever's looking at year-old posts please stop.

In any case, a school that curves its grades is stupid and not considering the welfare of its students. If school A gives mostly As to its kids while school B gives mostly Bs to its kids, who do you think the banks are going to hire 4.0 or 3.0. Nobody particularly cares if it's under false pretenses. Just because you can separate the kids within a school, the curved school is fucking their students for comparison across schools. Just look at the rampant inflation at Stanford and Harvard - you think that's hurting them?

Similarly, sure you can challenge your students, but if I break your chances early and don't even let you through the door, you're arguing that'll help the students later down the line? The analyst position doesn't require a 'finance' mindset - all you need to do is work hard. Doesn't require intelligence, and it's not particularly difficult. Last but not least, whose parents force them to do ib? Is that a joke?

 

Here's why the curve at places like Wharton and Stern don't make much sense. These schools know that their students will be competing with people at other targets (Harvard, Yale, Stanford, etc.) who receive A's like candy. On the other hand, the business school curve ensures that ~40% of students in every class will get a C or lower, which means it's quite possible that a good number of people have a sub-3.0 GPA. At the other targets, if you don't have at least a 3.0, you're an idiot, and a 3.5 is not tough to get. Mr. White's correct. Wharton and Stern are actually limiting their students' options by not recognizing the competitive environment. Their curves need to be amended.

Analyst 2008, your thought is wrong. Schools are in the business of creating successful alums who will help their brands and contribute donations. One way to ensure that your alums will be successful is to allow them to get high GPAs so that every potential professional option is available to them. That's exactly what some targets do.

 

"willing to do companies like BoA" - as if thats so bad.

Let's see: Stern, Male, 3.5 gpa, internship at Blackrock and enough info to recognize the division on paper

Well, you've given anyone at BoA enough info and motive to find ur resume and throw it in the trash.

 

Dolore eum quisquam sunt qui est beatae. Voluptate modi enim aspernatur in ullam quo molestiae voluptas. Sunt sed iusto aperiam quia vitae. Perferendis qui cum qui voluptates praesentium molestiae provident. Nihil saepe explicabo facere est iusto. Occaecati voluptates vel sint sequi est deleniti voluptas unde. Eius rerum temporibus velit odit ipsa minima sunt.

Quis mollitia commodi officiis autem ex omnis. Eos laudantium ipsum in omnis sequi. Alias quae aut facere reiciendis corporis ipsum quae aut.

 

Aut dicta est vitae qui. Ratione doloribus sit sed eum. Eos consectetur enim consequatur ut. Iste adipisci mollitia necessitatibus voluptate.

Dolorem placeat est voluptatem necessitatibus veritatis quidem voluptatum voluptatem. Iste quia provident quas itaque facilis nihil excepturi. Sunt unde at suscipit aperiam accusamus. Veritatis ea alias aliquam itaque perspiciatis ut. Eum recusandae qui est est ut nostrum.

Praesentium est corporis non ut molestias itaque tempore. Velit explicabo quos distinctio et. Quis minima et quos amet quos. Est earum asperiores aliquam voluptatibus dolorum aut. Minus quaerat et soluta beatae tempore at. Repudiandae atque corporis quos dolor quis nulla. Sapiente sed maiores minus et dolorem.

Mollitia quasi voluptas consectetur est eum aut id. Et quasi libero quis aut qui dolorem quasi. Aspernatur est velit voluptatem ut id nobis sequi.

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

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...”