MSF Rankings 2017

  1. MIT. Strong program. Consistently places people in solid AM/IB/HF/quant/etc. roles.
  2. Vandy. Really good program in the south. A handful of kids will get NY BB IBD but most people who bust ass will get into a solid ib/am/etc. shop.

3a.Texas. Similar to vandy. Strong alumni network and can get in nice houston/dallas shops for MM or a few BBs.
3b. Wustl. Really smart group of students. Places well with midwest firms. Can really argue that they're better than Texas.

  1. USC. Still a new program but you could network like a mad man and probably get into a decent ib shop. USC is kinda like Texas to Houston/Dallas ib, alumni network will pull hard.

  2. SMU Not a bad program. Not really a wow lights out program but still can get something decent and Dallas is pretty cool.

  3. BC Not bad and location helps. If you want to be in boston it's a good spot to be.

7a. Rochester- Poorly located but again you can get into a decent F500/tas/valuation out of it.
7b, Villanova- Basically the same as rochester but in Philly.

In reality if you want solid ib from one of these programs you need an internship, excellent networking skills, and get into the best program you can.

 

Dude Nova isn't that bad and I've said it countless times on wso despite TNA acting insulted that I don't join his Nova-BB ib bandwagon. Majority of programs are solid for F500/valuation/etc. but only a few can get you decent looks at prodigious groups like IB/AM/ER/etc.

If you're a senior it makes sense to apply to as many msf programs as you can while also networking for ft roles. You never know what can happen. If you want to be competitive for ib msf is similar to ft recruiting, you still need an internship.good resume, etc. but the school will help if you go to a better program. Vandy places lights out for people seeking ib who had a legit chance prior. The problem is most msf people don't go to a top program, or have decent experience, or in some cases do not network and expect the MSF program to spoon-feed them an ib job.

 

On a serious note what do you really think of MIT's MFin value compared to top 20 or top 10 MBA? I looked at MIT MFin's class profile and it is comparable to that of the top MBAs. One of the good reasons people choose MSF/MFin is that they don't have good work experience/internships to step into higher finance in the first place. If you reach high GMAT/GPA, can it offset lack of good work experience in MBA programs? For example if you score 720 on GMAT with 3.8GPA (MIT MFin average), would it make more sense to wait a few years and go straight for a top MBA? Especially if you are aiming for IB/PE/HF/AM.

 
BillBelichick37:
I specifically said Nova is useless for HF/VC and it is. It's incredibly tough to place in that from any msf program, though.
Did you or did you not post "I do think a lot of people who go to MSF programs don't know it is basically a useless grad degree."?
 

For the people on this site who only want elite finance: Don't bother applying after USC.

For people who want any finance gig (FLDP, valuation, etc.): Way more programs available. Any of the top programs I mentioned will work.

I've repeatedly made the argument that most people should network and try to get into the best finance job they can BEFORE applying to MSF programs because it's a decent sized opportunity cost and you can get into B-school later. Apparently that is so nefarious. Go ahead and look on linkedin at profiles of msf students: Most have little to no internships related to ib, ok-ish grades, and expect an MSF to place them in BB IB.

 
BillBelichick37:
For the people on this site who only want elite finance: Don't bother applying after USC.

For people who want any finance gig (FLDP, valuation, etc.): Way more programs available. Any of the top programs I mentioned will work.

I've repeatedly made the argument that most people should network and try to get into the best finance job they can BEFORE applying to MSF programs because it's a decent sized opportunity cost and you can get into B-school later. Apparently that is so nefarious. Go ahead and look on linkedin at profiles of msf students: Most have little to no internships related to ib, ok-ish grades, and expect an MSF to place them in BB IB.

I'm not saying you're nefarious. I'm wondering why a few days ago you said they were useless. Now you're saying they're useful for some finance jobs. I'm well aware of the outcomes for many of these programs. What evidence do you have that most people entering these programs expect to be "placed" (I hate that term btw) into elite investment banking roles? Why do you keep posting about MSFs?
 

Useless for IB: Most programs. Again most people would be better off networking or going to a boutique ib and lateraling than expecting an msf to get the BB IB.

Uhhhh have you seen any of the posts online about MSFs, linkedin profiles of msf students, youtube video applications? IB/AM are unequivocally the most sought after.

 
Best Response
BillBelichick37:
Useless for IB: Most programs. Again most people would be better off networking or going to a boutique ib and lateraling than expecting an msf to get the BB IB.
If you're only limiting IB to bulge bracket firms then sure an MSF will probably lead to disappointment. If you went an undergrad school with basically nobody in finance then there aren't really many networking opportunities for you. Maybe as an undergrad I could have networked into a small boutique firm but I really didn't know much about business at all even as a senior. On the other hand, I found several IB opportunities (and even had a PE interview believe it or not) directly as a result of grad school at UVA, although I ended up going into consulting. I made a bunch of connections to MDs and VPs in IB that had gone to UVA either as undergrads or as MBA students. Were they at bulge brackets? No, but I was realistic with what I could get out of the program. And I wasn't even much of a networker.
Uhhhh have you seen any of the posts online about MSFs, linkedin profiles of msf students, youtube video applications? IB/AM are unequivocally the most sought after.
No? Why would I even pay attention to that shit? I come to this website to learn for my own benefit and to help the occasional person when I have knowledge that can help them (and also to talk shit about politics). For instance, since I graduated from the program at UVA, I can knowledgeably speak to the program at UVA. It's not relevant to me what random MSF applicants are doing. You're also not considering the fact that you're on a website mostly dedicated to people trying to break into IB. It's not representative of the whole population applying to these programs.

I don't know what your situation is, but if you're a working person and you're spending all this time obsessing over other people are doing you need to reassess your priorities in life. It's not healthy. I'm not trying to flame you, I'm just trying to understand why you're posting about other people applying to MSFs every day.

 
iridescent007:
Hi thurnis haley, I am applying for UVA's MS Commerce program. Would it be possible for you to provide some insights into placements of IB and Consulting? Thank you.

Like I've said it's strongly dependent on your background/interests and willingness to put in effort in recruiting. But in general Americans (and non-Americans who have ties in America) in the finance track who put in the effort in recruiting do well. (I only say Americans because the Chinese students do their own thing. But most Chinese students seem to have done extremely well with their UVA degree back in China...I digress...). If you want to PM me I can possibly give more specific info.

 

Rankings are pointless because MSF's are pointless. Save the time/money 99% of the time.

Only useful for smart non-target kids who really fucked up recruiting and have no experience but really strong academic records. They can take the time to get some more degree bling and network with the benefit of a stronger alumni network, etc. But being candid, most of the kids who populate these programs THINK they're that smart guy who got fucked by recruiting when in reality they got fucked in recruiting for a reason and their MSF isn't going to change their reality a year or two down the road.

 

lol I'm just going to say no comment since I'm apparently an anti-msf crusader. Outside of the top 5 I think it's much less useful for the population of this forum.

It's best for non-targets/targets who had fo internships and were very close to getting ib for ft but couldn't due to bad luck/lack of interviews. Most people on this forum really are an overly optimistic bunch. Most people at real non-targets get 2 or 3 BB/EB interviews at best or none at all and plenty of target kids who seek ib won't get in. It's honestly better for most people to drop the BB IB or bust attitude because it doesn't do you any good.

 

I think the ranking is fairly accurate, though I still believe Rochester should be higher. It really is an underrated program with a very strong curriculum. Curriculum matters in the MSF world; it's how you differentiate yourself. I've opened doors by knowing shit when others did not. Contrary to what the IB-or-busters say, knowledge matters.

“Elections are a futures market for stolen property”
 

I don't agree that we can't have meaningful MSF rankings. It's simply not true based on my experiences. I've interacted with a lot of MSFs and I can tell you that schools are objectively better than others.

Quick ranking:

  1. MIT
  2. Vandy
  3. UVA
  4. UTA
  5. WUSTL (2 years ago I would have had WUSTL above UTA)
  6. USC
  7. Villanova
  8. Rochester
  9. BC
  10. SMU
  11. Others (JHU/Baruch/Fordham)

This may reflect my east coast bias.

“Elections are a futures market for stolen property”
 

All of the programs you listed are relatively easy to gain admittance to, provided you don't have an absolutely awful GMAT and GPA. None are "prestigious". How did you come up with these target schools? Are you targeting the northeast/NYC?

In my opinion, most MSF programs are not worth their cost as they don't really add much in terms of value to your candidacy at top financial institutions. Only the top 5, or perhaps only the top 3, are worth it from a cost/benefit perspective. You don't want to pay 70K after tuition and living expenses to be stuck working a regional corporate finance job making 50K. There are exceptions to this, as a lower ranked program could still be beneficial if you have no finance/business experience at all.

You didn't really give us much information in your initial post so I don't have much to go off of. What are your stats - GMAT/GPA? What are your goals after graduation? What career path do you want to pursue? (IB, consulting, corp fin, etc..)

 

Princeton isn't MFE, although it's probably more quantitative than most other MSFs. Taken from their website: "Unlike mathematical or computational finance Master programs, we teach all of finance. This means, for instance, that we teach accounting, corporate finance, behavioral finance, etc., in addition to stochastic calculus, derivatives pricing, financial engineering, etc. "

Also, no formal requirement for work experience.

 

Are you a domestic or European student? Cass might be ok for london, but Visa issues will be a hurdle for you in the UK.

What's your GMAT? You have a random selection of schools that you've applied to. OSU, LSU and Temple are all good schools, but I see a major uphill battle getting an ER spot from any of them.

If I was forced to choose I would probably say Temple. The degree is in IM, philly has some finance that you can intern at and you're close to NYC for networking purposes. Just make sure you use the various acceptance letters to negotiate a scholarship or something.

 

LSE's MSc in Finance program is new, maybe to some people they would be worried that this program is not yet established enough.

However, I believe their MSc in Accounting & Finance or MSc in Finance & Economics programs have a very good reputation.

 

I'll let others comment but I'm skeptical of how useful it can be. You're online so there has to be significantly less OCR. Plus, if it is online is it really worth the money? You could learn most of the material through the CFA, books, etc.

 

heard there is an in person option that could improve yield bigly. but honestly whoever the hell wants to apply should have done the most due diligence

[quote="M7 MBA, iBanking. Top MSF grad. AntiTNA. Truth is hard to hear! But... "] [/quote] [quote="DickFuld: Yeah....most of these people give terrible advice."] [/quote]
 

Stanford's MS&E is also pretty popular (more than half the Stanford alums who came to recruiting events on campus were MS&E grads).

Same as previous poster true about analyst/associate level.

 

like the list in general.

makes me wonder if UT will keep climbing to #2. USC, UT and BC has the 3 best undergrad strengths (maybe a bit better than Vandy?) but the MSF scene is quite different

[quote="M7 MBA, iBanking. Top MSF grad. AntiTNA. Truth is hard to hear! But... "] [/quote] [quote="DickFuld: Yeah....most of these people give terrible advice."] [/quote]
 
BillBelichick37:
Vandy is a solid school. I think they don't have as strong alumni network as UT or USC but the quality of the career services and structure of program is perfect for finance.

What do you think of Nova?

Vandy may have gained an advantage b/c their undergrad have Econ only but has this MSF bridge between MBA and UG.

Back to Nova - Correlation matters. Anything Harvard/Stanford elevates by Brand, and many others (Baruch, Santa Clara U) elevates by Location. Program-level variation rarely happens (e.g. various Columbia quant masters). Given those, I say Nova isn't a hotshot by brand, may have some location-adjusted strength in NE.

I don't know how good the program is, skeptical, because (a) the $$$ they kept giving out in losing competition, signaling consistent defeat (b) loser products like @TNA, so I think it's an average program with above average marketing spend and NE presence. Wouldn't be so great elsewhere.

[quote="M7 MBA, iBanking. Top MSF grad. AntiTNA. Truth is hard to hear! But... "] [/quote] [quote="DickFuld: Yeah....most of these people give terrible advice."] [/quote]
 

The reason you haven't seen much "best masters of finance program" threads is because the truth is, masters of finance programs are really most effective when you just use them to be in school for another year to qualify for SA positions. What i mean by this, is, that these programs are useful when you didn't land a SA position Junior year, but landed one Senior year under the guise you would be in school for another year and thus qualify for a SA recruitment Senior year of college.

Even at the best masters of finance programs, you would have a really tough time recruiting for FT IBD without having a prior IB internship. This means that people aren't as focused on getting into the best program as much as they are landing a SA position before going into these programs. Happy to elaborate on this further

 

So IMO - it all comes down to where you are at in your career. Do you need a 1) MSF or 2) CFA? Most people probably do not need a MSF if they already come from a finance background. Especially in most banking jobs, you learn all of the quant/modeling/underwriting/analysis you would do in a MSF program. Only pro to me is the possible network/older folks in finance respecting that you went out and got another degree to show you are a bit different then those who just have a bachelors in finance.

At the EOD of the CFA is probably tougher, a bit more respected and a SHIT ton less money if we are talking in comparison to a top-10 MSF program where you are just pissing away money. You do give up the network that you could possibly get from a top 10 MSF, but at that point, what is it worth?

Curious to what you guys all think is better..., which might start another healthy quarrel on this forum----

1) CFA or 2) MSF and WHY?

 
BillBelichick37:
Agreed. CFA is really inefficient for people who would be going to msf programs. You go to a msf because you can't get the ft job you want yet and need some prestige to get you over the top. Most kids would be better off networking and getting something out of ug (FLDP, corpfin, boutiques, valuation, etc.) and wait for the mba later. MBA is absolute king.

disagree but see my post below for the various tradeoff dimensions. It really depends on what dim someone wants the most. CFA is least helpful for job aspects but most for technicality progression ON A JOB.

[quote="M7 MBA, iBanking. Top MSF grad. AntiTNA. Truth is hard to hear! But... "] [/quote] [quote="DickFuld: Yeah....most of these people give terrible advice."] [/quote]
 

I think you have good thoughts on that. I would allude back to the mindset of variable selection techniques in statistical regression w/o technicality:

One way to select, say, 10 variables out of 20, is to remove the "least useful" variable that hurts the least......................so basically, if you have a CFA, a MSF or MBA, which are you willing to give up first? Once you know that, the reverse is what you should chase first.

To determine "which hurts the least", you have to come out with some formula to eval. You could judge by technicality (ER always require CFA/progress), networking, cost, self-restraint, value of staying in workforce, etc.

So determine the set of things you care, think which one is the first to throw (and thus not do), and re-eval frequently.

[quote="M7 MBA, iBanking. Top MSF grad. AntiTNA. Truth is hard to hear! But... "] [/quote] [quote="DickFuld: Yeah....most of these people give terrible advice."] [/quote]
 

But aren't MFin programs more respected than MiM programs? Generally, I believe that MFin programs are more competitive in terms of recruiting and curriculum. Of course, I could just be wrong.

 

I'm in a MSF program (although not one mentioned by OP, ouch) and have a bunch of friends from undergrad and work who are MBAs. At least from my observations, the two attract different clienteles with different career interests. While some of my class have transitioned into MM IB, IB is definitely not the path most sought after. The coveted positions are in ER, AM and consulting as a distant third. Whereas MBAs skews more towards consulting and IB. I could be wrong but, like I said, just from my observations.

I would like to see the MSF vs MBA argument be put to bed since I believe it's different strokes for different folks but that would foolish to think it'd happen.

"That was basically college for me, just ya know, fuckin' tourin' with Widespread Panic over the USA."
 

Again, most finance students dream of some sort of fo finance gig out of these programs. Nothing wrong with that but you'd be a fucking retard to turn down a ft offer that is still solid like GS risk to do a msf program for the hope of a bb ib job. Better off trying to get a MBA later. Reasons why MBAs are better: More options, less risk being in a 2 year program, WAYYYYY more recognizable, and you have solid shots at 200-300k+ jobs if you go to any top 20 program. There aren't even 10 MSF programs in the US that can place a respectable amount of kids into IB/ER/AM/etc.

Now I"m kinda curious to hear about what msf you're at. Feel free to pm but my guess is JHU?

 

Yeah most folks would take any high paying job over more school/debt, that is a no brainer. I see your fixation on BB IB so I don't think you're tracking what I'm saying here. If you want BB IB then a MSF is not a good choice. Hell it should take no more than 15 min of research to figure that out. However for ER, AM, "tier 2" consulting and HF (depending on the quant focus of the program/applicant background) it's a good place to be. Not everyone wants IB. You are right in that a MBA offers more options where as a MSF you're kind of pigeon holed out of the gate.

"That was basically college for me, just ya know, fuckin' tourin' with Widespread Panic over the USA."
 

Et autem asperiores qui officiis cum rem aliquid. Tempora maiores sunt cum nisi. Omnis molestiae dignissimos quae. Rem autem expedita et.

Dolorum soluta ab sint. Placeat excepturi ut error corrupti explicabo odio exercitationem. Reprehenderit reprehenderit omnis minima omnis repudiandae incidunt. Quia sed repudiandae est.

Sit dolor recusandae ratione est repudiandae modi officiis inventore. In nulla pariatur alias ut. At quia molestiae accusamus repellendus.

Ut quo atque impedit illum placeat dolores. Tenetur distinctio et nulla minus quisquam cupiditate minus. Quasi et est dicta.

 

Molestiae fuga aperiam minus maxime quia. Est necessitatibus nam ducimus ut facilis soluta. Impedit hic qui minus eligendi dolorem cumque voluptates inventore. Harum voluptatem quidem maiores sequi omnis. Rerum autem excepturi cupiditate sed rerum ad architecto.

Suscipit accusamus quo fugiat nostrum laudantium iure totam. Voluptate odio ut praesentium eos rerum omnis. Qui voluptates dolores et ut alias. Corporis sunt expedita officiis explicabo.

 

Perferendis quo quasi ipsam alias dolore facilis. Ducimus voluptatem harum dignissimos maxime et. Voluptatem excepturi ut dolores distinctio aliquid qui quasi dolorum. Fugit est consequatur nihil. Nihil corporis deserunt ipsa sunt voluptates est facilis quo. Qui quos nobis accusantium commodi qui exercitationem.

Veniam laborum tempora molestias quo. Adipisci quia aperiam accusamus sit quae rem. Est voluptatem aliquam architecto quibusdam tempore perspiciatis labore. Quam aspernatur voluptatem ut natus.

Et aut explicabo dolorum asperiores cupiditate. Rerum atque corporis fugit aspernatur quasi. Nemo dolorem totam saepe in quis nam odit voluptatem. Porro sint est voluptas cupiditate saepe soluta. Itaque totam quaerat non non explicabo.

 

Consequatur consequatur quia quia voluptate et voluptas ut. Nihil explicabo occaecati aut dolores.

Reprehenderit beatae dolor quia dolor voluptas. Et qui adipisci et. Debitis explicabo rerum omnis dolor ab. Et aut totam voluptatem recusandae quia. Doloremque doloribus consequuntur facilis nobis quo. Beatae esse ducimus in fuga.

Et et sed provident sed reiciendis enim. Dolor numquam minima quasi. Et cupiditate perferendis dolorem voluptate facere. Magnam deleniti libero animi cumque nisi excepturi.

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (202) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (144) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
3
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
5
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
6
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
9
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
10
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”