HBS versus Wharton
Lucky enough to be in a position to be accepted into both of these schools in R2. What makes the most sense for a career in PE. Seems like Wharton would be a ton of fun but HBS has a slight edge for the network and brand.
Based on the most helpful WSO content, here's what you need to know:
Network and Brand: HBS holds a slight edge in terms of network and brand value, especially for private equity (PE). Many top PE firms recruit exclusively from HBS due to its strong alumni network and historical ties to the industry. The brand recognition of HBS is also unparalleled globally, which can be a significant advantage in the long term.
Recruiting Opportunities: HBS has a higher percentage of its class entering PE/VC roles compared to Wharton. For example, 19% of HBS graduates go into PE/VC, while Wharton sees 13% entering PE. This indicates a stronger pipeline for PE recruiting at HBS.
Alumni and Career Support: HBS alumni are often tapped for exclusive roles that may not even be posted publicly. The alumni network becomes particularly valuable 5-10 years post-MBA, as you start connecting with partner/MD-level professionals across top firms.
Wharton’s Strengths: Wharton is still an excellent choice for PE, with a robust finance curriculum and a strong representation in the industry. It offers a more finance-heavy focus, which can be beneficial if you want to deepen your technical skills. Additionally, Wharton is known for being a fun and collaborative environment, which might enhance your overall MBA experience.
Long-Term Considerations: If your goal is to maximize your chances of breaking into top-tier PE firms and leveraging a globally recognized brand, HBS is the better choice. However, if you value a finance-focused education and a vibrant MBA experience, Wharton is a strong contender.
Ultimately, both schools are elite and will open doors in PE. The decision should also factor in personal preferences, such as teaching style, location, and the type of MBA experience you want.
Sources: https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forum/private-equity/wharton-vs-stanford-gsb-for-private-equity-recruiting?customgpt=1, Wharton, Harvard, and Columbia, Stanford vs Wharton vs Booth vs Columbia for PE, Wharton, Harvard, and Columbia, GSB overtaking HBS?
At risk of sounding super snobby , I actually had no idea that this is a question and people even consider taking Wharton over HBS.
The conventional snobby wisdom in a lot of finance circles is that HBS and GSB are often worth it and Wharton is maybeeeee worth it depending on who you ask.
I personally think this is kind of a dumb mentality but it does seem to be how a lot of finance people view the world
If you did PE before and are going back to PE, the difference is small, especially if you’re not trying to trade up significantly in AUM. Yes, some firms only go to HBS to recruit on campus, but the # of seats open at the post-MBA level for these couple firms is so small I wouldn’t factor into your calculus.
They vast majority of firms will look at any M7 MBA with prior PE experience, the key being having prior experience.
If you aren’t gonna forgive yourself for not going to HBS because of some prestige addiction, then go there. Otherwise, choose between the type of student life you want to live. HBS students are more “productive” with their time - they have to go to class, many pursue side projects while in school, and cohorts are forced to spend lots of time together so you spend time w different people. Wharton is basically a party school, with a lot of people “exploring” half-assedly but really gonna go back to their same type of fund, consulting firm, etc (unless they’re career pivoting). Both are fun and a joke compared to real work, but Wharton can be far more fun and degenerate, if that’s what you’re looking for.
Up to you what you want. Too many idiots on this forum that don’t understand personal choice because they’ve never made an actual decision for themselves in their lives.
This is not true. Firms do not look at the M7. They look at H/S and then W. Booth gets looks at some Midwestern firms. Beyond that nothing.
There’s a lot of firms out there other than the Blackstones of the world, the majority of whom go through HH on an as-needed basis. A proportionally tiny amount do OCI, especially when you consider the actual # of seats available. At the very least they lump together the HSW folks into a pool and pick from there for those in consideration.
The reality is, most MBA grads are going MM, most of whom are gonna go through your typical HH channels and if you’re plugged in there from your prior experience then you’re at least gonna be given some shot. I see Kellogg, Booth, and CBS many times.
And so, I’m making generalizations that most likely apply to the “most people” camp, from personal experience and friends at these schools.
This is shockingly tone deaf and inaccurate. This is maybe true for exclusively some of the MFs and a choice few UMMs and that's it. But to say none of the M7 even get looks just isn't right at all. No one should listen to this.
If you're optimizing for PE placement and opportunities, HBS is the choice without question. This is one of those 'all squares are rectangles but not every rectangle is a square' analogies. GSB/HBS can recruit everywhere, but for better or worse, there are some shops where Wharton would be viewed as 2nd tier (and why risk it).
Context: Current MBA at W that came from a well-regarded UMM. Only applied to HSW and only got into W.
If you got into one of the specialized degrees at W (HCM, Lauder, etc.), I'd definitely consider that over H/S. There are multiple people in my class that chose W over H/S because of the specialized degree programs and these people tend to be the very top performers at W. If this is not you, you're probably better off at H/S. The median person at any of these schools will be less "impressive" than your PE colleagues - think consultants, tech sales, software engineers, etc., but the top tier candidate pool is larger at H/S. I'd guess there are maybe ~20-30 very solid PE candidates at W versus ~80-100 at H so it's easier to standout relative to your MBA class at W. Also interestingly, there are fewer people from the very top funds at W (e.g., no one from H&F, KKR PE, BX PE in my class). Depending on where you were pre-MBA, you could be one of the top people at W but it's nearly impossible to be a top person at H.
Recruiting is pretty similar at both schools with basically the same companies doing campus visits and resume drops but there is probably a slight edge to H in terms of exclusive opportunities. I got interviews at all of the top funds that had resume drops and don't think W held me back from getting any opportunities. It's really on you / what the fund is solving for once you get to the interview stage anyway. Also the macro environment is very bad right now so neither place is really that great in terms of opportunities at the moment lol. From speaking to friends at H/S, it seems that networking is pretty difficult from there relative to W; from my experience, W alumni are more likely to go to bat for you and push your resume forward.
W is more flexible with course scheduling and doesn't exclusively use the case method so I'd give the edge to W in terms of academics (if this even matters). W is probably more fun as a whole and there are fewer people here than H so you tend to know people better.
Philadelphia vs Boston is a completely personal decision but personally think Philly is better because it's closer to NYC.
Overall, congrats on both offers and can't go wrong either way. I'd go to H if solving for prestige and to W if you got into a specialized program and are looking to have a lot of fun.
Do you have MM/ LMM PE people in your class? How have they been doing in recruiting?
Definitely a lot of MM / LMM. Most are doing search fund or leaving PE altogether. Post-MBA hiring market is brutal unless you have strong pre-MBA experience
Where are you headed post MBA?
Lol I certainly wouldn’t say HCM / Lauder are any different than the broader Wharton pool, some of those kids are “top of the class” but there’s plenty of duds in those pools too. I agree though that if you’re interested in those programs it’s more of a reason to choose W over H.
Would argue you actually feel W is bigger since there’s significantly more cross class overlap and each class year is only ~100 less people than H. Agree with the rest though
For the PE pedigreed people at W, do you see most going back to PE or switching to other sorts of finance roles?
And I'm curious, are people able to place into HFs (SM or top 4 MM)?
Not to knock Wharton which IMHO is a tier above every other school except H&S.
But H&S are also a tier above Wharton. The "HSW" abbreviation was made up by Wharton people. Just being honest as someone who couldn't get in to any of them.
That's not to say definitely choose HBS. There are personal factors at play in terms of your goals, specific programs etc. But assuming you have a handle on those and you're gauging the finance community's gut level impression of the two, I still think its H/S > W > the rest.
I think this bears out in cross-admits and yield rates as well. However, one could also argue that H/S UG also have higher yield rates and cross admit rates against Princeton, so is H/S UG a higher tier than Princeton then? At the end of the day, it is splitting hairs
For me the test is: if someone told me they got into school X and school Y, would I be a bit suspicious if they told me that they chose one over the other.
If someone tells me they chose Wharton over H/S, I am a bit suspicious. I imagine it happens a few times each year, maybe because of Lauder or personal ties to Philly or something. But I'm definitely surprised and a bit suspicious.
I'm not the same way about H/Y/P/S undergrad. If someone tells me they got into any two of those schools, I'm not suspicious that they chose Princeton or whatever the lesser one is supposed to be.
Not saying there's no difference in prestige, not saying it's not a bit easier to get into maybe Yale over the other three. Simply saying its not enough to be suspicious. I'd probably throw MIT/Caltech in as well, but we'd be getting into a whole new topic if I start going down that road.
You should go to H. Congrats
- H alum who only applied to H
Congrats on Howard U. Great outcome and nothing to look down at.
I did a whole bunch of diligence including scouring through employment reports, mapping classes coming in and out to calculate placement conversion, scoured through team pages, did calls. I think the punchline is as follows:
You will have way more fun at Wharton. HBS is far more prestigious. So pick one
Totally agreed. It’s not H or W that makes the difference. The pre-MBA MF folks tend to get into H more and thus their background is more attractive.
If I came from KKR and was making a holistic evaluation, I’d go to W because it’s a much more fun and let loose experience. But…if I came from KKR I’m probably predisposed to wanting more prestige and optimizing career, so these types of folks prefer H anyway. Self fulfilling to an extent.
HBS.
You really can’t underestimate the access and network 5, 10 years+ down the line.
Say one day you wanted to raise a fund, I can 100% say you’d get more LP looks coming from HBS.
I agree with people saying maybe marginal difference at beginning, but the slope of HBS is much higher than Wharton on average, which is compounded over time and multiplied by larger class sizes (your network isn’t really your class of 1000, is the years above / below you).
Also there’s a few professionals who have retired to become professors; best way to get a good relationship with them is the case method as you show off your hard work/ability to think on feet (vs being in a lecture).
Just food for thought.
I mean maybe if you're starting up a search fund and / or raising just from rando HNW individuals and other non-institutional investors? Most of my work now is LP investing and can safely say I've never even come close to knocking somebody's background because of where they got their MBA in general, let alone H vs. W. Honestly don't even ascribe much value to somebody having an MBA period, if at all.
Not disputing your actual experience, simply saying, from what I've seen from LP's coming from HBS improves your probability of getting an LP check. (Probability being defined as of 100, maybe instead of X you get X + (Y more) LP's willing to give a look).
Also to be honest if you're a first time raiser you'd arguably be looking for 'rando HNW' + Multi-fam office money to start as insto aren't generally touching first-time managers unless they're basically ex-top brass of a known fund (and even then...).
You're a deployer though so would defer to your exp on first time managers - what pedigree do you look at?
Worked as an allocator writing $200M+ checks to PE funds. Can confirm we didn’t place a lot of value on “where” GPs went to school. If you prove you’re a good investor, it doesn’t really matter.
I work in UMM PE and we recruit MBA's for FT and summers. I would say HBS comprises 30-50% of our intake, with the rest composed of a mix of GSB (they don't want to do PE usually), W, Columbia and LBS / INSEAD (I work in a global office) .
From the perspective of a 60 yr old who knows many grads from both, including family members, college roommates, professional colleagues and good friends, I would tell you Harvard gives you more street cred and much more optionality over a long career.
Both are outstanding, and congrats on your offers. The people I know who have gone through Harvard are more business leaders than fixated on a finance career. Some have spent time in finance but ultimately moved to leading the organization, whether it be business unit, division , or CEO. The Wharton folks I know have stayed in the finance lane. Not a bad thing and today's CFO is more of a business partner to the CEO than in yrs past, but they're still not running the business.
If that matters to you, go with Harvard. If not, wherever you feel you fit the best.
I think this street cred point is a good one. It should never be the main consideration, but it matters on the margins for someone who is torn.
Speaking just anecdotally from my own experience, H/S feel a lot more rarefied air then W. I got waitlisted at W for example, where as H/S didn't even invite me to interview. I've had peers from W at several of my jobs and I've interviewed many W recruits for those jobs, but very rarely did we ever get a look from an H/S kid. Other examples like that where I'm reminded from time to time that H/S is another level up on the totem pole.
Ultimately I think success is about the individual and I would 100% advise someone to choose W if their gut is telling them that something about it suits them better. Your own performance will matter 100x more than these brand differences. But all else equal, there is some difference in street cred.
Would you say there is a rarity difference between HBS and GSB as well? After all, GSB's acceptance rate is half of HBS's (and probably safe to say most of HBS'ers got rejected by GSB?)
Assuming cost of attendance is similar, would take HBS in a heartbeat
Est magnam aliquam perspiciatis aut tenetur sed explicabo inventore. Voluptatem quos veritatis hic est. Eum est impedit vel praesentium.
Voluptates molestiae rem dolore eligendi quasi voluptas. Et ullam sint quaerat qui. Enim quisquam eius ea laboriosam.
Dolorum porro odit eum. Fugit nihil eum aliquid aut id.
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...
Cum accusamus ut voluptatem quia. Eius omnis nemo quis iste quam commodi dolore. Quam modi totam ipsam perspiciatis. Et exercitationem amet quod nihil illum voluptas voluptatem. Nisi beatae necessitatibus rerum et rerum. Totam ipsum et aut amet.