UCL or Warwick for maths?
I have received offers from UCL and Warwick University for maths. I want to go into Investment banking.
Ucl is more well known but Warwick is better for maths.
For a career in IB, degree doesn't matter so do you think UCL would be the better choice?
Please just don't say its my choice since I honestly don't mind where I'll go.
Also, could I get an answer ASAP since I don't have long till I have to confirm my uni firm.
Thinking purely for recruitment. Hands down UCL. I know I sound like a dick, and I am sure you'd have a good time at both either way. UCL's name has stood the test of time as a pretty good uni both in the eyes of the UK and internationally. For recruiters whilst Warwick is respectable within the UK, it rhythms with "clearing university" internationally and for most employers. Of course there are other factors in recruitment, not just university, UCL being on the low end of target schools, Warwick being in the lower end of semi target schools, if not non-target.
Also, same guy who just commented, no recruiter/hiring manager cares about this year's maths rankings... Happy to answer any questions that may help.
I thought UCL and Warwick are both solid targets but ig it differs.
I am leaning towards UCL since the requirements are lower and cause of it's reputation.
Thanks for the info though
I mean I don't see why international reputation really matters? Unless you're wanting to work in the cess pool that is APAC its not rly important. It'd be like turning down UChicago for Dartmouth or smth in the States cos the latter is an Ivy.
I'd also go UCL but it seems like you don't know what you are talking about. You'd probably see more warwick alumni in every internship than UCL people. Warwick places exceptionally well, and has a good applications culture, but not from Math. If it was UCL econ vs wwk econ then Warwick would place you much better. In this case UCL, but it's close imo
Isn't warwick better for maths tho?
it's in COWI isn't it?
But yeah UCL seems like the better pick
You'll learn more at Warwick and if your looking to work in IBD in the UK your chances are also better there.
Based on friends that have studied at both institutions and are currently interning.
Is UCL even a target uni?
Reading the comments, I'd go with UCL too, mainly because the first thing people ask is which uni, UCL is good, Warwick reputation not so much. Just asked my ED for you and he said "Warwick? Is that in Poland?". Yes that's what he said. The degree prestige matters second, but I second the first comment, it's not just university, it's also networking and extra curriculars, and background that play more. Any MS likely came from an angry Warwick alumni.
>say some bukey shit
>designate any MS as sad warwick grads
Hmm I see
I'd probably pick UCL then(or imperial if i get an offer :p)
Thanks for the help
Few thoughts. I would lean towards UCL, fwiw (unless you get Imperial). If it turns out you want to do a maths PhD, going to UCL over Warwick is unlikely to significantly disadvantage you when applying to Cambridge, Imperial, and Oxford.
Gonna go ahead and say the anonymity culture stuff is still really shit at UCL. You have to really go out of your way to make friends in London unless you wanna just be straddled with the unsocial international students in your accom.
For reference I go UCL and have offers in S&T at Goldman, MS and some IBD offers at firms like rothschild. I'm going to be straight: go warwick. Honestly with recent years' recruiting numbers warwick is a "target" and will be fine. Kids at Oxbridge are getting dinged for random shit so your university only helps so much, Warwick will aid you in the x% you need it to. However, the fact that its seen as a top 4 maths school (and there's a significant gap after the top 4) will help you if you want to recruit into things like prop/quant trading which makes multiples of IBD comp.
Also UCL don't let you take probability in first year and specialise heavily in fluid mechanics which is aids.
EDIT: Worth noting we've spoken about this a lot before OP if your username is anything to go by. I just got through recruiting and have mentored kids who just went the spring (first year) recruiting process too. He's at UCL too and cleaned up for springs but the people that did maths didn't, although people who do maths at WW don't seem to do outwardly amazing for IB springs either. UCL or WW isn't going to make or break your application, you need to be genuinely impressive in the sense that you're interesting + likeable. Neither will provide an advantage you notice, if you were gonna fail at UCL for recruiting, you'd fail at WW too; the same goes for LSE, Oxbridge whatever the fuck passes for a target these days. London loves its randomness in recruiting.
dinged for what exactly? I know you said random shit but any examples?
No I quite literally mean for random shit. An EB recruiter once told me it often feels like they're just interviewing the same candidate over and over again so I assume from that you can imply that the deselection parameters are somewhat arbitrary. The number of target kids whose applications get sunk at the hirevue is p amazing. For every kid you see on LinkedIn posting a BB SA, 10-15 from their uni didn't get one lol. Be it from Oxbridge, LSE whatever. If Oxbridge guaranteed you or gave you a really strong shot at top firms like GS/MS etc, you wouldn't see people end up at big 4 or BNP type firms. Oxbridge is impressive but its pretty useless if you can't stand out effectively.
No guarantees in life.
- Goes UCL and has literally had unprecedented success recruiting
- Tells OP to go to Warwick
Look OP. I would NOT pick Warwick over UCL unless cost is an issue. You can go into prop from both, you just need to actually be that smart. Warwick is ONLY recruited seriously in the finance realm via its business/maths school(s). Outside of finance, it just isn't viewed the same way as UCL and can't compete on brand and legacy. I'd argue the same is true even within finance, just not to the same extent. It's just too young and too many of its courses cannot attract top students. It's like GS vs PWP. The legacy of GS means regardless of how good PWP becomes, it just can't catch up outside the finance world, regardless of the EB people that will incessantly hype it up.
There are asian kids with multiple A*s doing bullshit courses at UCL. You just don't find that at Warwick.
I could've got all these offers from some random semi-target tbh, I was literally a top candidate in my cohort so I wouldn't use myself, an n=1 candidate as a benchmark. Most UCL kids, along with other targets will do much worse. I could literally link someone that does chemistry at Warwick and has a first-year summer in IBD at a BB, and springs at MS/GS...
If you honestly think the marginal difference between WW and UCL is going to confer a significant advantage over the other, one that is worth overlooking things like social life and the such, you really don't understand recruiting. The COWI and UCL gap is quite significant, firms like Akuna and 5R are quite stringent when it comes to university.
I went UCL and having spent over a few years in the industry, I would recommend UCL over Warwick for several reasons:
1) UCL is marginally better represented internationally in terms of HR point based initial screening; with Oxbridge having slight point score over Imperial/UCL/LSE which are treated equally; above Warwick.
2) Studying in London makes attending networking/interviews much more convenient; you waste less time travel; some top firms may trial out some new competition and they are likely to pick a uni that's closer to London (example Morgan Stanley university community impact challenge etc); finally you are more likely to still go through with additional interviews with other firms once you already secured one, as you have the close proximity advantage, which helps broaden your exposure.
3) With regards to top tier prop trading firms recruitment, they have specific school targets, and it is certainly not based on 'top 4 maths schools', it is purely based on the calibre of average student quality. I would recommend checking sponsor list with each university's' biggest finance societies and career fair sponsorships to find out which one is better represented. I work in one of these prop firms, and only Oxbridge grads are meaningfully better represented.
Both schools are fine, but I see above marginally benefits at UCL.
Imperial definitely is a cut above UCL too in prop trading representation generally.
Alright so from reading this entire convo, I think there is a marginal benefit of going to UCL over Warwick. I honestly don't get why people say that it's not 'social'. I attended an offer holder open day yesterday and I kinda liked it tbh. The cost is also a lot higher to go to UCL. Most likely I'm gonna firm Warwick unless I get into Imperial which isn't gonna happen.
Thanks for the help and info though :D
Wow didn't expect this many comments haha
Thanks for the help, I'll try and consider what everyone here has said. :)
Both are honestly great. The main problem I find with maths grads is they can be slightly autistic and not client ready
what do i do then to be 'client ready'?
They wouldn't pass the culture / can I grab a drink with this guy or gyal test. I am generalising though from what I experienced at uni, plenty of cool mathematicians who end up in IBD / PE
I'm at Warwick and pretty much everyone who worked & wanted an internship in IB got one
I think the fact that you're doing straight Maths could override the Warwick/UCL prestige battle. Warwick and WBS are sometimes seen as a target, UCL's so bloody old that it has automatic clout.
Yeah true haha
If all you care about is IB i'd advise you not to do Maths.
Can only speak for Warwick but the workload is very high, can't really take anything helpful for IB for credit (e.g. finance modules) and the general standard is high bc pushed up by the people who make it their lives.
This gives you less time to a) enjoy yourself and become a more interesting person and b) prepare for interviews/ get involved in finance socs
Obviously, you have chosen at this time but i'd recommend making sure you try and keep options open to switching to joint honours courses with module selection etc.
don't rly need to take relevant modules tbh, I'd advise against generally speaking as it can help you stand out and mention interesting things in interviews.
altho I did science so biased
Yeah that's true but it's a bit too late. If I could change to a joint degrees, that would be worse though cause it has more workload
Simply not the case from what I have seen
Hmm I see
In sint tempora non ut ex itaque. Est alias ut sint ipsa.
Est mollitia voluptatem perspiciatis recusandae perspiciatis voluptas aut. Exercitationem fugiat sint veritatis omnis in. Et ex totam vel ratione labore eos est. Eveniet debitis ut magnam cumque iusto atque eum nihil. Dolorem autem neque voluptatibus tempore dolorum voluptas expedita.
Est aut autem doloremque consectetur nostrum. Natus dolorem in architecto qui est autem omnis deserunt. Rerum nemo recusandae vel qui facilis nisi. Accusantium officiis itaque sapiente soluta deleniti eum.
Non ut eum illum facilis. Voluptatem recusandae fuga esse sit. Atque odit aspernatur natus incidunt doloribus. Excepturi natus tempore eos molestias culpa. Non sit aperiam sed eligendi.
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...
Placeat consequatur unde et consectetur molestias. Aut eos voluptate in in. Consequuntur autem nihil eius et molestias. Sed veniam ipsum corrupti facilis. Eveniet enim hic distinctio quae aspernatur.
Nihil debitis dolores dolor ut modi. Iure iste assumenda ad iste possimus id aut dicta. Veniam qui expedita est fugiat. Consectetur repellendus non dolorem. Aut illum sed itaque suscipit dolorem fugit.