Wharton vs Stanford GSB for Private Equity Recruiting
I'm an associate at a megafund in one of their Asia offices. Applying to MBA programs this year with a plan to continue in private equity post MBA in the US. Not focused exclusively on megafunds.
Wanted the community's thoughts on how to rank Harvard, Wharton, and Stanford in terms of post MBA private equity recruiting in the US. I've heard that Harvard and Stanford are slightly higher than Wharton on the 'prestige' spectrum which leads to some firms (especially VCs) hiring exclusively at these schools. However, is that the same for buyout-focused funds like BX / KKR / Carlyle / TPG / Bain Cap and the like? How does Wharton stack up against Stanford when it comes to these roles?
Recently, I personally hired 4 post-MBAs. 1 Harvard, 1 Wharton, 2 Columbia. 1 person from Stanford made it to the middle part of the process but not further - that person landed at another MF (Carlyle / KKR / TPG).
My firm does not participate in on-campus recruiting. When students reach out to us for internships or post-MBA roles, we will spend time to review the resume and take a closer look if student has Harvard/Stanford/Wharton/Columbia on it. Whether a person gets a phone interview depends on pre-MBA experiences (PE, Merchant Banking, IB, MBB, etc.), MBA coursework (finance, PE/VC), MBA student club activities (PE/VC club, investment club), other MBA experiences (e.g., PE internship, authored a PE paper/study in one class, worked part-time for a couple of weeks for a PE firm while in school, etc.) and previous industry vertical experiences (i.e., is this person a good match with our industry verticals/investment focus areas?). If person can articulate in phone interviews (with HR and other Senior Associates) how the background/education fits with our firm's philosophy, why our firm is first choice and can articulate PE, Corporate Finance and investment decision criteria (industry trends, target's competitive position, cash flow generation ability, etc.) we most likely will start in-person interviews, our LBO financial modeling test and investment thesis presentation to recruiting committee. That said, once a person makes it to the phone screening stage it is a level playing field and it purely depends on the person's performance throughout the recruiting process and not at all from where the person received its MBA.
In my opinion, the decision from where to get your MBA should be based on the following factors: - Teaching methodology (HBS almost exclusively uses the case-study method - can you sit through two years of business school with this teaching methodology?) - Offered coursework (H/S/W/CBS all offer finance, PE/VC, etc. courses but what is the quality of the courses? What are the chances that all your preferred PE/VC courses are offered? What is the quality of the professors? Will you be able to expand your existing PE/VC skill set with the courses offered?) - What type of exposure can you get to PE/VC while in school? Do PE/VC firms come on campus and offer field studies, 4-6 weeks long student projects, networking opportunities, etc.? - How easy is it to network with PE/VC firms while in business school? e.g., it is probably easier to network with PE/VC professionals if you go to school in NYC, Boston, Stanford vs. Philadelphia (for in-person coffee chats you would always need to commute to NYC, probably less important in post-COVID-19 world where virtual meetings might do it) - Strength of alumni network in your targeted PE shops (after researching this very extensively my conclusion is that Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, Columbia are significantly represented at all top PE shops) - Long-term international brand value. Harvard is known everywhere but how many people know Stanford, Wharton, Columbia in your countries/geographies where you intend to work in the next 20-30 years?
For disclosure: I hold an MBA from one of the H/S/W business schools.
Anecdotally, I’ve seen more people from Kellogg than Booth in MM/UMM PE. Very small sample size and still way behind H/S but seems fairly consistent.
Kellogg MDP isn't the best example, as they've sent 1-2 people from MDP to Kellogg (not sure if returning or not), and one of the senior team members at MDP lectures at the school.
Largely you would see much more representation in PE roles from Booth vs. Kellogg -- this may be more of a selection bias though, with a large % of Kellogg looking at moving into consulting and general management, whereas folks at Booth tend to target finance roles much more (both IB and PE). I think both schools are viewed more or less similarly by funds.
Note - 1 place I would expect to see more Kellogg representation is on the operations side of PE, be it at MM or larger fund levels. I know a few people who graduated from Kellogg and moved into these roles, where they are more likely to value a strategy and consulting background vs. an IB/investing background
One of the posts mentioned CBS. I think CBS has the luxury of being in NY and benefits from that significantly. There are also a handful of good PE associates every year who choose CBS over other, higher ranked programs, due to desire to stay in NYC. That being said, with the exception of its value investing program, which truly is fantastic and a good route into the HF world, most would consider CBS the weakest of the top 7 schools.
I wouldn't say it is "a lot" but there are a handful each year from UMM / MF backgrounds who choose to stay in NY for whatever reason (usually a wife / girlfriend working there).
If you are coming with MM / LMM Pre-MBA experience, it shouldn't be that difficult to move back into a similar sized fund from any of these schools. Kellogg and Sloan probably have the least representation on the buy-side (due to aforementioned selection bias), so maybe those would be more challenging just given smaller alumni networks in the industry.
As the earlier poster said, I think funds look at your full story / background when recruiting. A MF/UMM fund will go to campus at HBS/Wharton because there is the largest representation there of people with pre-MBA relevant experience (i.e. IB > similar fund size PE). If you're a candidate with that same background who has gone to CBS or Booth, there isn't really any reason for them not to give you a look, just need to make sure you get in front of the right people (which isn't always that easy).
Make no mistake, I don't think any fund is sitting and thinking that students are getting some unique education at HBS/Wharton that is going to make them a better investor; their Pre-MBA experience is much more relevant. But targeting these schools is an easy filter / the most logical way to cast a wide net of people with the desired Pre-MBA experience.