Currently have 2 options: 1) start at non target and if it doesn’t work out, go for target masters (lse/imperial) 2) start at “target” undergrad (Warwick/UCL level) and hope that I can break in (masters won’t be possible due to costs) In the end, option 1 will be more expensive than option 2.
| +14 | LSE, Imperial, HEC, ESSEC, ESCP ?(MiF) | 9 | 3d |
| +12 | Chance me : Bocconi Msc in Finance | 5 | 5d |
| +11 | Master in Finance Profile Evaluation | 4 | 1d |
| +9 | How has USA MBA recruiting been for internationals this year (M7 / T15) in IB, DFI, and LMM PE? | 1 | 3d |
| +9 | Advice for Msc choice | 1 | 3d |
| Would you choose YPSM or Oxbridge? | 5 | 58m | |
| +9 | MSc Finance Profile Evaluation | 2 | 4h |
| +6 | EOR or other programs at EUR/RSM | 2 | 1d |
| +3 | LSE MiM vs Imperial MiM | 7 | 3d |
| +3 | LBS MiF | 1 | 14h |
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.
** target masters will be a lot more competitive to get into as well, so no guarantee on that
I would respectfully disagree, competition at the undergraduate level is much more fierce. Most non-targets who achieve a 2:1 easily land LSE/ICL/LBS/Oxbridge non-MBA Masters as its a big revenue generator for those institutions. For those targeting IB, a Masters is only done to give an extra shot at recruiting (excluding EU countries where a Masters is the norm in e.g. Germany).
In OP's case, option 2 would definitely be better, both in terms of costs and recruiting. At Warwick/UCL, you get a shot a Spring Weeks in Y1, SAs in Y2 and Y3, and off-cycles post-graduation without having to do a Masters (many start FT work while applying for OCs).
Always go to the best school you can. In general want to minimize the 'ifs' (or risks) in your life as being successful on itself is hard enough, adding complications makes it even harder. You have no idea how the future goes and "if" you will even get into a target masters.
Take the target undergrad, you may not even need the target masters degree if all goes well.
Thanks for the reply. I understand your point, however my main concerns are:
1) I’ll have to give up admission at my uni (with scholarship) to hope to get admitted to a target, where in the end I might not even be able to go if the costs are too much and loans can’t be secured
2) (if I do end up going to target ug) paying off the huge loans I’ll have and the pressure of getting a good job since I won’t get a second shot at it (since masters will definitely be out of the question)
Have you been accepted to Warwick for an undergrad? You mention you 'hope to get admitted to target." It's a bit confusing.
If you have indeed been accepted to Warwick for undergrad, going there and getting a great job post-undergrad may negate any need for a masters degree.
If you have not been accepted to Warwick for undergrad, then you don't really have a choice.
Warwick is a target. Step below Oxbridge or LSE, equal to UCL / Imperial (better name but not a finance hardo uni) and better than everything else.
What would you think my prospects would be in terms of getting in banking: Warwick for undergrad only or non target undergrad followed by (hopefully) a masters at a target?
Vel nostrum quis voluptatem iure eum. Officia quod sint corrupti provident ut. Ipsa repellendus adipisci molestias alias. Sit quae quod qui provident qui rem harum. Qui rem qui fuga omnis fugiat.
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...