LSE MSc Finance vs LBS MFA
Hi all,
I've got an offer from the LSE for MSc Finance and an interview coming up with LBS for the MFA.
I'm not sure as to which one would be the best option for me. I'm looking to start my career in asset management, acquire the CFA charter, and eventually become a portfolio manager in a hedge fund or asset management firm. Asset class doesn't matter much atm.
I have 15 months of internship experience; 1 month Big-4 outside the UK, 12 months economic research/forecasting in London, 2 months discretionary macro at a <10bn AM firm in London. Passed the CFA Level 1 exam with a score over the 90th percentile. No GMAT. I'm set to graduate top of my class from a non-target in the UK, hence my decision to go for a master's now - expand my network and raise my chances of breaking in the industry. Also, recruiting this year seemed horrid, at least from my perspective. Hopefully will be better next cycle.
In my mind, I prefer LBS as they seem less focused on academic performance during your course, but more so on helping you secure an elite job after graduation. This may be completely wrong - it's just how it seems to me from the outside.
Would love to hear perspectives from anyone's who's attended either programme.
Thank you!
Based on the most helpful WSO content, here's a breakdown that might help you decide between LSE MSc Finance and LBS MFA, especially considering your career aspirations in asset management and your goal to become a portfolio manager:
LSE MSc Finance: - Prestige: LSE has a fantastic brand name and is known for both its undergraduate and postgraduate programs. It's particularly noted for its MSc Finance program, which has high visibility. - Academic Rigor: The program is known for being academically challenging, which aligns with your goal of acquiring the CFA charter. - Alumni Network: LSE's MSc Accounting & Finance program is the oldest in the city, with a large alumni network, which can be beneficial for networking in the finance industry. - Placement: The program has an amazing placement record in investment banking and sometimes in private equity, which could be a stepping stone to asset management.
LBS MFA: - Career Focus: The MFA program at LBS is known to be career-focused with an excellent placement across the finance spectrum, which aligns with your preference for a program that aids in securing a job post-graduation. - GMAT Requirement: Typically, a GMAT score of over 680 is valued, but since you don't have a GMAT score, you might want to consider how this could affect your application. - Work Experience: Your 15 months of internship experience is a plus since LBS values work experience highly in their candidates. - Networking: LBS may offer strong networking opportunities, which is crucial for your goal to expand your network.
Given your experience and the fact that you've passed CFA Level 1 with a high score, both programs could suit your needs. However, if your priority is a program that is less academically intensive and more focused on career outcomes, LBS MFA might align more closely with your preferences. On the other hand, if you value the academic challenge and the prestige associated with LSE, then the MSc Finance program could be the better option.
Remember, both institutions are prestigious and offer great opportunities for someone looking to break into asset management. It's also worth considering the culture and environment of each school, as well as the specific curriculum and how it aligns with your learning style and career goals. Connecting with alumni or current students from both programs could provide additional insights to inform your decision.
Sources: LSE MSc Finance or LBS MFA, Why Work in Asset Management?, https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forum/school/uk-master-in-finance-advice?customgpt=1, European Masters Rankings, European Master in Finance programmes (pre-experience)
Based on the most helpful WSO content, when considering the LSE MSc Finance versus the LBS MFA for a career in asset management and the goal of becoming a portfolio manager, here are some points to consider:
LSE MSc Finance:
LBS MFA:
Given your experience and aspirations, both programs could serve as a strong foundation for a career in asset management. LSE might offer a more academically intensive experience, which could be beneficial for CFA preparation, while LBS might provide more direct career support and networking opportunities that could be crucial for breaking into the industry, especially given the competitive nature of recruiting.
Ultimately, the decision may also depend on the outcome of your interview with LBS and the specific details you gather about how each program aligns with your career goals. It's also worth considering the culture and network of each institution, as well as the specific curriculum and opportunities for specialization within asset management.
Sources: LSE MSc Finance or LBS MFA, https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forum/school/uk-master-in-finance-advice?customgpt=1, Why Work in Asset Management?, European Master in Finance programmes (pre-experience), European Masters Rankings
Congrats on both - however, I fear that if you currently hold an offer from LSE you will not hear from LBS in time (they release decision March 14th or 15th, whereas your deposit deadline expires in 4 weeks). Therefore, the pragmatic choice is to choose LSE, which is still a targeted masters. If you truly believe in LBS and getting an offer, you can choose to reject LSE, however be aware that this is risky (all graduate applications are high variance) and, frankly, the difference between LBS and LSE is not that big.
Thank you! Yes, I am aware of that - but regardless of LBS, I'll probably ask for a slight extension of 3-4 weeks for the LSE deposit deadline either way (so I can gather the funds to pay for it and make sure I can fund the whole course). So I am hoping that there can be some overlap between the two. Of course I'll have to ask for this extension - but I don't think a few weeks should be a problem?
I have no idea - this is something you would have to discuss with LSE. Just know that they are likely aware of LBS's deadlines and may or may not accept your request. Also, LBS is around 4k GBP more than LSE... which makes the delta between the two programmes marginal at best.
Fair points - thanks again!
I’m gonna give you an honest opinion as I have friends in most of these programs. Depends on the asset class you’re looking to work in within AM/HF. If you want to work with public equities / equity research which mostly requires fundamental analysis, I would go to LBS as they will easily set you up for a job in the industry. The program is very focused on corporate finance which is enough for working with public equities. But if you are interested in getting a broader education across different asset classes that are more closely related with the markets (commodities, currencies, fixed income, etc) then I would choose LSE. In your case I actually think Oxford or Imperial (due to their quant nature) prepares you better for a career in asset management as opposed to IBD for example.
Et sit id tenetur iure non ut. Hic rerum enim dolores. Numquam eos occaecati fuga perferendis.
Aperiam velit autem nam veniam. Itaque ab enim sit maiores sunt rerum placeat. Occaecati et voluptas quis corporis dicta ut eveniet. Dolores architecto temporibus velit sapiente eum nihil blanditiis quam. Asperiores eaque ex tempore ut nihil quidem assumenda minus.
Tempora et perferendis nisi ad sit. Hic at sed architecto quis. Ut possimus consequatur dolorum quia. Sunt eius est repellat ut accusantium sequi velit. Saepe occaecati laudantium atque nulla officia deleniti.
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...