I am a high school senior looking to break into IB. I have an offer from Warwick and potentially an offer from a university ranked 11-20 in the United States (think along the lines of Vandy, Northwestern, Berkeley). Assuming I get into both, which one betters my chances?
| +85 | [2026 - October] Unbiased Prestige Rankings | 50 | 20m |
| +85 | Who is the final boss in Houston Energy? (GS, JEFF or EVR) | 18 | 1d |
| +66 | You should probably leave IB | 26 | 5h |
| +45 | Why Do We Turn Comments? | 10 | 16h |
| +44 | McK vs A&M Offer Decision | 24 | 1h |
| +43 | Tomorrow Will Be Better | 5 | 2d |
| +40 | Moelis PCA vs Lower tier BB Coverage | 29 | 4h |
| +24 | How much should you ask questions / seek feedback as an intern? | 8 | 12h |
| +22 | UBS’s Investment Bank Is Building an AI Slop Factory | 3 | 1d |
| +22 | Lateraling as Analyst | 18 | 2h |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
For the price Warwick is hard to beat
Money is no object for me. In terms of objective value, does Warwick still supersede a US uni ranked 11-20?
Warwick is a top 2nd tier target (only behind LSE/Oxbridge) for finance. Great for London. 3 year degree means you get 1 year ahead. Shit city tho (Coventry). Not sure how it compares to top 11-20 for NY. I feel like London vs NY should be a consideration, since it would be naturally harder to go from studying in one continent to working at the other.
If location and money are not deciding factors, I would strongly recommend you to attend Northwestern or UC Berkeley over Warwick.
UK education is miles behind that in the US. Coming from someone studying at a "tier 1" UK target, I would take a top 20 US target any day of the week. More resources and definitely more prestige.
Warwick will get you looks in London, but what if you want to work in NY/anywhere in Asia? US target hands down. Just to give you a breakdown of my BB IB class in HK. Almost 80% are NYU, Wharton, Northwestern, Berkeley. UK schools would make up no more than 10%.
I'd agree with NW or UC Berkeley over Warwick if location is no issue, for education and entering %. I wouldn't say that UK education is worth less than US though, but just due to the comparative population size, its just that Top 3/4 UK are roughly equivalent to the Top 20 (probably more) in the US.
I'm ok being stuck in the UK if it is easier to break into banking from Warwick than a US T20 in their respective countries. Tbh its whatever makes it easier for me to get into banking, regardless of the country.
If thats the only consideration, despite my UK bias I think the US options give you a better shot
TalentandHardWork I agree with most of your points (especially about the contrast in resources and the prestige differential) however I'd argue against UK education being miles behind. An argument could be made that getting a 3.6+ in the US is easier than getting a mid-2.1 in the UK.
Have met plenty of people from Warwick during SA recruiting this year, they seemed good candidates. Not sure how much semi-target helps in the UK though with BB, to me it felt I was only at a disadvantage to target uni's (Oxbridge, LSE) going into EB recruiting but I still had a few interviews in that space
Personally would take that US university over Warwick - you'd get more brand value globally. Warwick is mainly known in the UK and West Europe.
OP, have you considered the visa problems you might face - or are you a dual citizen?
How difficult is it to acquire a work visa in the UK? I'm a US citizen so I'll need to go through that process.
Quibusdam cum possimus in quam velit et. Aperiam perferendis dolores illo quo. Est quasi libero explicabo quia dolore. Quos ea quisquam voluptas quasi praesentium omnis.
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...