Comprehensive US MSF Ranking

Since there is not a ranking of US MSFs I elected to make one. I’d like to thank ANT/TNA for his great list on MSFHQ.com it is an invaluable resource for anyone considering an MSF. This is a work in progress and I welcome any feedback. This is just my opinion and I welcome suggestion or corrections and will be more than willing to edit this.

Tier 1 MIT

Tier 1A Claremont McKenna, Vanderbilt, WUSTL, Virginia

Tier 1B Boston College, Florida, Southern Methodist, Texas, Tulane, Villanova

Tier 2 Baruch, Boston University, George Washington, Houston, Illinois, Maryland, Ohio State, Purdue, Syracuse, University of Rochester

Tier 3 Alabama, Arizona, Brandeis, Case Western, Colorado, Delaware, Florida State, Johns Hopkins, Louisiana State, Michigan State, Northeastern, Oklahoma State, Pepperdine, Rochester Institute of Technology, Temple, Texas A&M, Texas at Dallas, Tulsa, Utah

Tier 4 American University, Bentley, California Santa Cruz, DePaul, Drexel, Georgia State, Hofstra, Fordham, Loyola-IL, Loyola-MD, North Texas, RPI, Texas Tech, West Virginia, Wyoming

Tier 5 Baltimore, Cal State-Stanislaus, Clark, Denver, Fairfield, Florida International University, Golden Gate, Lewis University, Michigan-Dearborn, Nevada, Pace University, Pacific Lutheran, Penn State, Portland State, University of Portland, St. Mary’s College, San Francisco, Seattle University, Southern New Hampshire, St. Joseph’s University, St. Thomas, Suffolk, SUNY Buffalo, Tampa, Virginia Commonwealth, Walsh, Webster, West Texas A&M

 
VoidTrading:
Just out of curiosity, do you mind sharing your thought process on how these rankings work?

Great list futurectdoc. Would like to see the answer to Void's question, but great list nonetheless. I'm sure ANT would agree with the content.

"Come at me, bro"- José de Palafox y Melci
 

Princeton is much more of a Financial Mathematics program, IMO. The requirements are very different than traditional, corporate finance focused MSF programs.

As for the "lower tier" programs, people don't use them to break into banking. You use them as a locate masters in substitution of an MBA. Most of these lower ranked programs are part time, night time or flexible for working professionals.

 
TNA:
Princeton is much more of a Financial Mathematics program, IMO. The requirements are very different than traditional, corporate finance focused MSF programs.

As for the "lower tier" programs, people don't use them to break into banking. You use them as a locate masters in substitution of an MBA. Most of these lower ranked programs are part time, night time or flexible for working professionals.

Aren't the Math reqs for MIT very hard as well?

 

I have a feeling that you're underrating American University. Mostly based on their admission stats and placements. Just my 2 cents

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell
 

Hahaha. I dig your reasoning. But it depends on what reputation you are mapping to. So for example, Purdue and Syracuse should both be ahead of Baruch, not only because they have a better reputation as UG institutions, but also as MBA.

Penn State should be on par with Ohio State, mainly because of their huge alumni base, and the fact that the program takes place in Philadelphia and allows for easy networking with other alums. Tempted to throw Virginia up on the 1A tier, mainly because UVA holds a lot of weighting and good recruiting.

Pace could also benefit from a bump, mainly because it has good location and if you're dedicated (some hustling with cold calls, networking, emails etc) it may just be easier to talk to someone who could help you break in.

I like your list and its definitely heading in the right direction. Just wanted to give you a little bit of input.

 
VoidTrading:
Hahaha. I dig your reasoning. But it depends on what reputation you are mapping to. So for example, Purdue and Syracuse should both be ahead of Baruch, not only because they have a better reputation as UG institutions, but also as MBA.

Penn State should be on par with Ohio State, mainly because of their huge alumni base, and the fact that the program takes place in Philadelphia and allows for easy networking with other alums. Tempted to throw Virginia up on the 1A tier, mainly because UVA holds a lot of weighting and good recruiting.

Pace could also benefit from a bump, mainly because it has good location and if you're dedicated (some hustling with cold calls, networking, emails etc) it may just be easier to talk to someone who could help you break in.

I like your list and its definitely heading in the right direction. Just wanted to give you a little bit of input.

I will move Purdue and 'Cuse if no one objects. Penn State is through Grand Valley not University Park, that's why it's down a level. UVA isn't a truly traditional MSF, it is a Masters in Commerce with a finance emphasis. Pace I will move if it gets some more support.

 

Thanks for the list, but if you have time, can you also give a broad description of each tier and what separates the tiers since I feel like it gets blurry at the bottom half?

73 good sir!
 
kc2siq:
Thanks for the list, but if you have time, can you also give a broad description of each tier and what separates the tiers since I feel like it gets blurry at the bottom half?

Tier 1, Full buy and sell side recruiting, national presence. Tier 1A More regional and less buy side recruiting. Tier 1B Regional, less BB presence, more MM and boutique. Tier 2 F500 becomes more prominent, placement is almost exclusively regional. Tier 3 F500 predominates, sell side recruitment is limited, mostly through networking. Tier 4 Almost exclusively F500, much more hustling/networking required. Tier 5 Institutions that are very regional in placement, networking is essential.

Tiers 4 and 5 are blurry, they are all very regional and if you want F500 or IB you need to network.

 

Hmmm. Good research skills! I think Purdue and 'Cuse should get the bump. Trying to look for some employment stats stuff off of the websites. Saw that Citi, JP, Fidelity and Dow recruit from 'Cuse. Didn't see anything from Purdue, but I just skimmed. Couldn't find anything Penn State related either (except that it is a two year program, with a built in internship).

I kind of hope we get to hear from some MSF students on this thread, only to get an idea of what it was like.

 

If you're going to include the Commerce program at UVA, you have to include the Duke Masters program.

Play the long game - give back, help out, mentor - just don't ever forget where you came from. #Bootstrapped
 

Here is a list of GPA/GMAT:

BC 3.4 656 Bentley 3.3 640 Case Western 3.53 708 Claremont 3.6 729 Duke 3.37 660 Illinois 3.35 670 Maryland 3.3 650 MIT 3.71 700-760 Ohio State 3.00-3.45-3.92 570-667-730 University of Rochester 2.8-3.4-3.8 610-680-760 SMU Cox 3.57 710 Vanderbilt 3.59 694 Virginia 3.20-3.48-3.83 620-677-750 WUSTL 3.47 722

 

Baruch is a Tier 5 school or even lower.....it's graduate school reputation is horrible...this is coming from friends I know who have done MBA's there and those who attend undergrad. The finance recruiting is trash. For OCR there is only about 2-3 firms that recruit for front office to middle office. Most recruiting is done in operations and back office roles.

 

I was under the impression Florida was in tier 1a school. They curriculum seems to be really good (lots of elective). Career placement is very good even though its more regional

It's not about the money. It's about the game between people.
 

Florida is mostly for UF undergrads and not quite at that level.[/quote]

I was expecting something like this. Thank you futurectdoc and ANT/TNA.

It's not about the money. It's about the game between people.
 

Not entirely true about Baruch, their MFE program is actually pretty damn good and quite competitive, their MSF and MBA is not so much. Their financial leadership program for undergrads is quite good for placing into front and mid office roles at BBs and regionals such as BMO and BNY Mellon. However, this is for SA positions, OCR for FT is absolute shit.

 

Never knew it was so easy to get into MSF programs (GPA requirements).

The difference between successful people and others is largely a habit - a controlled habit of doing every task better, faster and more efficiently.
 
mhurricane:
Never knew it was so easy to get into MSF programs (GPA requirements).

That's more of a general trend in Bschool, Columbia's MBA has a 3.5 average and 10-90 of 3.1-3.8. Business school's tend to look more at the GMAT than the GPA, with relatively few exception the GMAT required is very high, at tier 1A schools the average is 715, for the tier 1B schools the GMAT average is 687 , the average for tier 2 schools is 668.

In addition here are a few more GPA/GMAT data points to add on to the list: GW N/A 659 Houston 3.4 640 Purdue 3.37 670 Syracuse 3.5 705 UT-Austin 3.5 704

 
monkeyDD:
If you think princeton is more of an MFE then you should seriously reconsider MIT. MIT's MSF is very quant based.

The core courses are Finance Theory and Corporate Financial Accounting, students are required to take Analytics of finance. This is not very quanty/MFE. in addition their math requirements are not obscene, they require Linear Alg, Calc, probability and statistics as well as some knowledge of Matlab, this isn't hardcore MFE style math http://mitsloan.mit.edu/mfin/program-components/personalized-curriculum…

 

Florida is making an effort to enrolling more non- UF undergrads. You just need to have a very good profile. They have tons of qualified and competent Florida stundets to choose from that you need to really sell your case. If you do, the UF program is top notch.

 
TNA:
Florida is making an effort to enrolling more non- UF undergrads. You just need to have a very good profile. They have tons of qualified and competent Florida stundets to choose from that you need to really sell your case. If you do, the UF program is top notch.

I can second everything ANT says, I recently interviewed with UF and they specifically said they were interested in opening up their program to more non UF undergrads, They place a large emphasis on work experiences, and having you show that you have thought out why you want to go into finance and what your career goals are.

 

Take Florida off the list. Vandy is solid for a US choice. Unforgettable which is supposed to be better, LSE or LBS, but I would probably go with one of those 2. International exposure can never hurt. Congrats

 

That's a very good position to be end. Wanna change shoes? I would go to LBS, as it has more of an elite character. LSE have MSc Finance, MSc Accounting and Finance, MSc Finance and Private Equity, MSc Accountancy and Organizations (or something like that)... a bit too much. The selection process at LBS is more strict, and all your colleagues will be very round candidates. At LSE you get a bit too many Asians or Eastern Europeans with great academics but soft and social skills not quite up the expectations.

 

no this dude did not get into LBS's master in finance program, the well-regarded one

the masters in management is a joke and has very little finance content

go to LSE

 
arden:
no this dude did not get into LBS's master in finance program, the well-regarded one

the masters in management is a joke and has very little finance content

go to LSE

Whoops! thought we were talking about the LBS MSF

ya LSE is better than that other program

 

^ not to mention that costs are higher than NY. Although with the USD-GBP exchange rate right now, I'm not sure which would come out ahead.

Since you have a SA position, maybe you can talk to some people in your group or the MD and ask for their opinions too? If money is not a consideration, I'd personally pick LSE, but then again I'm a big city guy.

 

I personally think London is cooler and more vibrant than NYC, albeit slightly more expensive. Also, you are only a short chunnel ride to Paris or a short and inexpensive flight to Geneva, Milan, Amsterdam, etc

It's funny about the exchange rate, I personally don't see it ever going permanently below ~1.50 against the dollar, but the exchange rate is very favorable for Americans now, but not so much for some UK employees.

Example, Big 4 entry level associates are compensated circa 28-30k pounds. Now when the pound exchange rate was at its normal level, this salary approximated that of its american counterpart. Today, however, they are only getting compensated ~45k in a city that is more expensive than NYC.

UK Investment Banks, on other hand, seem to have their act together, and are paying ~42-46k base, which does approximate the 70k base paid in NYC.

 

First off, thanks for all of the responses.

My SA is at a BB in the United State, so I would not be living in London any more than the 9 months that the program is calling for.

It looks like LSE and Vandy are the favorites.

I have received a scholarship for 40% of tuition rom Vanderbilt, so it would be a much cheaper option than LSE. But, I do not want to make money an issue, I realize that the value over the rest of my career is more important than the 25k or so difference now.

My concerns about LSE are:

  1. Name recognition in the US. I know it is a good school, but the USNews rankings have LSE at like 65-70 in the world, right next to wisconsin-madison and behind vanderbilt. Is this right? It sounds ridiculous to me.

  2. Alumni base in the United States (I have no desire to pursue a career in Europe).

My concerns about Vanderbilt:

  1. Not a great placement record. Only one to a BB IBD this year (as far as I know so far)

  2. Nashville vs. London = much to be desired

Any further advice would be appreciated.

 
TheFullMonte:
First off, thanks for all of the responses.

My SA is at a BB in the United State, so I would not be living in London any more than the 9 months that the program is calling for.

It looks like LSE and Vandy are the favorites.

I have received a scholarship for 40% of tuition rom Vanderbilt, so it would be a much cheaper option than LSE. But, I do not want to make money an issue, I realize that the value over the rest of my career is more important than the 25k or so difference now.

My concerns about LSE are:

  1. Name recognition in the US. I know it is a good school, but the USNews rankings have LSE at like 65-70 in the world, right next to wisconsin-madison and behind vanderbilt. Is this right? It sounds ridiculous to me.

  2. Alumni base in the United States (I have no desire to pursue a career in Europe).

My concerns about Vanderbilt:

  1. Not a great placement record. Only one to a BB IBD this year (as far as I know so far)

  2. Nashville vs. London = much to be desired

Any further advice would be appreciated.

LSE has a great name recognition; you realize that for the rankings (in terms of alumni, academic programs, and research quality) the University of Wisconsin and Vanderbilt are globally recognized institutions, so there is nothing wrong with being grouped amongst them. Also, don't put too much stock in rankings. Some rankings have the UW at 16th in world, some have it at 56th, some rankings put the University of Washington above Cornell- it all depends on which metrics are being used in the study. A good rule of thumb is that if your university consistently shows up in the top tier of the numerous world and national rankings, as LSE does, it's a globally recognized and world-class institution.

But anyways, If you have no desire to pursue a career in Europe, it makes ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE to study there. Study in Europe=Work in Europe. Study in USA=Work in USA. LSE is a good school, but the NYC BB's already have more than enough candidates from the USA target schools.

Given the above, you would have to leverage your BB internship with recruiters and do a lot of networking overseas if you go to LSE but want to work in NYC. So why don't you just leverage your BB internship from Vanderbilt? It's a good program, it's cheaper, and you have the work experience to justify getting a full-time offer. Also, who's to say that you won't get a full-time offer from the BB you intern with this summer? If that occurs, then where you study becomes even less important.

Of course, if you want to work in London, and I don't see why you wouldn't, do LSE.

 
AnthonyD1982:
Vandy has only placed on person in BB IBD? That sounds uncommon.
Sounds pretty surprising, too. But just because it's a good school doesn't mean the banks recruit there.

AFAIK, Illinois and Wisconsin only get 2-3 into BB IBD every year. I'm not sure which schools rank where, but Illinois and Wisconsin have a lot more students graduate every year than Vanderbilt.

 

I think a key thing to keep in mind is front office IB placement anywhere. BB is still ideal , but with the way things are mmkt and boutiques are great places to start. When you are looking at MSF programs from solid regional schools you need to be open to working at smaller shops. If you only want BB then top 5 MBA programs are what you should be looking at.

 
AnthonyD1982:
I will agree with above. I have heard really good things about the MSF program at Wisconsin. Presentation and interview skills are the one thing MBA's really trump MSF students with.

In my post above about Wisconsin I was talking about Wisconsin undergrad. I guess what you are talking about is Wisconsin's MS Quantitative Finance, which I know nothing about firsthand, but it seems that it places people in Security Analysis roles.

From what I gather, the biggest problem facing the Wisconsin business program, both BBA and MBA, is that despite having intelligent and motivated students, the career center doesn't prepare them well enough nor does it go out of its way to forge important relationships with Chicago investment banks, and the majority of students wind up lacking the professional luster and self-presentation skills that one needs to break into high finance.

For example, I was browsing through the resume book of the UW real estate club, and despite the fact that the UW has one of the strongest real estate programs is the country, the resumes were poorly formatted, unpolished and unimpressive, and frankly, if I were a recruiter that had no prior experience with the university, I would ding most of them right away.

 

I still think Vandy has a really solid MSF program. BoA and Wachovia (WF) recruit for FO there. Nashville is a cool area and you take classes with and interact with the MBA class a lot which is a positive. I would go to Vanderbilt if I was looking to work in the US after graduation.

On a side note, the schools that the OP listed strike me as kind of random. The London based MSF programs are fine, but why Vanderbilt and U of F. Boston College has a solid MSF program, UIUC has a great one as does Purdue.

 

I think my MSF application choices make pretty good sense: Vandy- 3rd best MSF in the US (my opinion) MIT- Cancelled interview BC of SA UIUC- SA ruined this one BC- night classes. Not really a pre experience program Purdue- My dad went to Indiana, game over

I do not understand the marginal benefit of having 10 alums at a BB as opposed to 7. Also, I already have multiple contacts at each BB and other good banks that I have kept in touch with for more than 6 months. Finally, I plan on getting an MBA in 3-5 years, so I will have that network to utilize as well.

I went to the Vandy discover weekend, so I am fairly sure my stats are correct. I was told that 4 out of ~ 35 have full time job offers and the program ends in 2 months. That is my only reservation about Vanderbilt, but should I even worry considering I have a BB SA.

 

FullMonte, I have not heard good things about Vandy's MSF program. You will find alumni on the Street from Vandy but consider the information you got from your visit to Vandy. You are right that you don't have to worry since you already have an SA, but for business schools applications, LSE will be a better name especially because their Masters in Accounting and Finance program is more selective and I recommend LSE to a certain extent even though you have no interest in working in Europe because you already have a SA position lined up.

 
futurectdoc:
kc2siq:
Thanks for the list, but if you have time, can you also give a broad description of each tier and what separates the tiers since I feel like it gets blurry at the bottom half?

Tier 1, Full buy and sell side recruiting, national presence. Tier 1A More regional and less buy side recruiting. Tier 1B Regional, less BB presence, more MM and boutique. Tier 2 F500 becomes more prominent, placement is almost exclusively regional. Tier 3 F500 predominates, sell side recruitment is limited, mostly through networking. Tier 4 Almost exclusively F500, much more hustling/networking required. Tier 5 Institutions that are very regional in placement, networking is essential.

Tiers 4 and 5 are blurry, they are all very regional and if you want F500 or IB you need to network.

If this is the case, then I don't understand UVA's ranking. We've had multiple buyside firms recruit OCR, from random hedgefunds, asset managers, etc. For I-banking, we've had pretty much all of the firms except goldman sachs and morgan stanley in addition to a ton of middle market and boutiques. Also, Bain, McKinsey, and Accenture + a ton of other consulting firms were on campus and I have classmates who have offers from both Bain and McKinsey. For trading, all of the top prop shops had resume drops and a couple came on campus. The only weak point was sell side S&T.

Couple people in my program who did Vandy undergrad and they came here because the recruiting at Vandy sucked.

just my 2 cents.

"Life all comes down to a few moments. This is one of them." - Bud Fox
 

Duke is not a MSF program

MIT and Princeton are more math orientated, but are obviously the best programs

Vanderbilt Villanova BC UIUC Tulane

These tend to be the core MSF schools

U of R is a decent MBA program, but I think their MSF program is a pretty small part of the overall program. UF is good if you want to work in Florida. So on and so forth.

Ranking these programs is even more pointless than say UG or MBA programs because the MSF tends to be niche and regional. If you want to work in Philly or NYC then Villanova would be a good choice. Boston or NYC then BC, if you like the south or NYC then Vanderbilt, Midwest/Chicago then UIUC or Purdue.

 
Duke is not a MSF program

MIT and Princeton are more math orientated, but are obviously the best programs

Vanderbilt Villanova BC UIUC Tulane

These tend to be the core MSF schools

U of R is a decent MBA program, but I think their MSF program is a pretty small part of the overall program. UF is good if you want to work in Florida. So on and so forth.

Ranking these programs is even more pointless than say UG or MBA programs because the MSF tends to be niche and regional. If you want to work in Philly or NYC then Villanova would be a good choice. Boston or NYC then BC, if you like the south or NYC then Vanderbilt, Midwest/Chicago then UIUC or Purdue.

I agree strongly with this post. It sums up the current MSF dynamic very well.

 

CMU is a great program, is more of a computational finance degree. Princeton is tops. This is the 1st year MIT has allowed non MIT UG's entrance into the program. In the coming years MIT will be a power house.

 
insight123:
I know there are no official rankings for MSF programs but I was wondering if perhaps some of the users at WSO who have already applied and gotten into programs could come up with a ranking to help other students. Here's a rough list of good programs (in no order) I've gathered thus far from different threads;

MIT Princeton Duke Vanderbilt UVA Rochester UIUC Claremont Mckenna Washington University in St. Louis UF LSE HEC Paris Bocconi Warwick Tulane Villanova

I think we should place the most weight on placements, reputation and class profile.

MSc Fin programmes are a lot more popular and well known in Europe. London banks actively recruit out of LSE, Oxford, Cambridge, Warwick, Bocconi, HSE, St Gallen, SSE, and RSM MSc programmes. I wouldn't get any MF in the USA unless it was an MFE from Princeton, Cal, CMU, Wash U SL.

 

UVA and Duke have watered-down MBAs, not MFin MIT's MFin has 0 placement record and is just selling its brand name for $75k (that's tuition only). Princeton has 100% placement, but last year they had like 23 students out of 600+ applicants.

During phone interviews, the interviewers from Duke's MMS and MIT's MFin didn't have a solid answer about recruitment placement/agreements.

 

Here is the problem. If you just want a Duke or UVA name then get a masters in econ, math, stats, whatever. Realize that a MSF actually increases your knowledge and skill set in finance while other programs will only give you a schools name.

I do not think paying 40K+ for a schools name is worth it especially since you will be excluded or overlooked for a lot of recruiting. When some top schools come out with a full fledged MSF degree then my opinion will change.

PS, I think MIT's MSF degree will become as good as Princeton's in a couple of years.

 
Here is the problem. If you just want a Duke or UVA name then get a masters in econ, math, stats, whatever. Realize that a MSF actually increases your knowledge and skill set in finance while other programs will only give you a schools name.

I do not think paying 40K+ for a schools name is worth it especially since you will be excluded or overlooked for a lot of recruiting. When some top schools come out with a full fledged MSF degree then my opinion will change.

PS, I think MIT's MSF degree will become as good as Princeton's in a couple of years.

Completely wrong. An MSF is all about the school's name because recruiting is all about the school's name. Why do you think there are target schools?

For IB (M&A, corp fin, etc), an MSF is pretty much useless. Financial modeling is given in training courses / on the job. If anything, it will only help the first 3 years or so. After that, your role transitions to managing the deal process which then transitions into relationship management. Does a VP need to know how to model the everliving shit out of an M&A transaction or successfully pitch and bring in business?

Interesting that people in the programs would be overlooked. Whats the general background in these sort of programs?

__________________________ if you ain't first, you last
 

Barbarian, from your description of how things work in IB and how you progress from simply modeling to running deals in three years indicates to me that you still breast feed. Please go back to the tit and leave this conversation to adults.

Yes, the name on your diploma will help you, but if you do not know your shit you will not get the job. A MSF degree will buy you another year at recruiting while increasing your knowledge of finance A LOT. You probably do not need to have such an in depth understanding of finance to succeed in banking, but for people out there who are interested in AM, S&T, etc a MSF will give you an edge. It is extremely popular in Europe and I think in 10 years you will see the popularity increase here. Especially with top schools such as MIT and Princeton now offering MSF degrees you will see them gain in prominence.

 
Barbarian, from your description of how things work in IB and how you progress from simply modeling to running deals in three years indicates to me that you still breast feed. Please go back to the tit and leave this conversation to adults.

Yes, the name on your diploma will help you, but if you do not know your shit you will not get the job. A MSF degree will buy you another year at recruiting while increasing your knowledge of finance A LOT. You probably do not need to have such an in depth understanding of finance to succeed in banking, but for people out there who are interested in AM, S&T, etc a MSF will give you an edge. It is extremely popular in Europe and I think in 10 years you will see the popularity increase here. Especially with top schools such as MIT and Princeton now offering MSF degrees you will see them gain in prominence.

So bigshot, whats your IB experience? Or are you upset that recruiters are "excluding and overlooking you" because they just don't understand what an MSF is?

Try reading comprehension. Never said progress from modeling to running deals in 3 years. After 3 years (aka when you become an associate) you TRANSITION into managing the process. Ya know, checking the analysts work for example. Then you TRANSITION into building relationships as you get to VP level.

You last paragraph isn't terribly relevant. For starters, I specified that I was referring to traditional IB - corp fin, M&A NOT AM, S&T. Secondly, who gives a flying fuck about Europe? This is AMERICA today. Not 10 years from now. MIT and Princeton's MSFs are quant anyways so they don't count. Thirdly, are you seriously saying that an MSF will prepare you more for an interview your regular finance classes or Vault guide? Because most interviewers are going to go way beyond that material right?

__________________________ if you ain't first, you last
 

People get an MSF degree for a variety of reasons and positions. Not everyone goes into banking.

Yes, reading vault guides is a better use of your time. No one gets an MSF degree to help with interviewing.

"Financial modeling is given in training courses / on the job. If anything, it will only help the first 3 years or so. After that, your role transitions to managing the deal process which then transitions into relationship management"

That sure sound like a pretty quick flow to managing deals to me, I think my comprehension was spot on. Plus the fact that you think you learn how to simply model in a MSF program shows that you know nothing about what an MSF is.

How is my last paragraph not relevant? Many questions on this board talk about working overseas, going to overseas MSF program, etc. In Europe the MSF degree is the standard. MIT is quant focused and so is Princeton, but all MSF degrees have a level of quant and programing.

Finally, you are the wrong one. I was replying to the original poster. You see his rankings?? He is including European programs. A MSF degree gives you a sizable jump in knowledge. Maybe you can memorize a vault guide and get the job, but if you do not understand how things work, theory behind shit, etc then you will screw up when things are not paint by numbers.

Let me give you a little lesson. Before I called you an infant I decided to scope out your previous posts. You brief past lead me to that comment. Coming in here and equating a degree to nothing, but the name on the diploma is immature and foolish.

 

As an incoming student, I'll put in a good word for Claremont McKenna's master's program.

I had the option of going to a large MM bank, but ultimately chose to stay in school for another year. It's new but very well funded. The class goes networking trips to New York and Hong Kong. Obviously, its not Princeton or MIT, but Claremont places well on the west coast and has a decent alumni list for finance for a school of its size.

Keep in mind that I only applied to MIT and Claremont McKenna. I passed on other schools like Tulane, Rochester, etc because I felt that these schools don't show up on the radar for finance recruiting. Missed the deadline for Princeton.

 

wow i didn't even know claremont mckenna had a ma finance....don't get how that didn't show up on my radar...i thought i did my research well. looks like that school gets some heavyweight recruiting. kinda sad that wustl's msf class profile has a higher gpa (3.5) and GMAT (728), but likely doesn't get any kind of comparable recruiting.

 

fair enough about claremont mckenna. for full disclosure, i will be attending wustl unless something crazy happens. i didn't get into MIT, and couldn't apply to princeton as my recommendations were not ready in time. i only wanted to apply to msf's and not mfe's (and similar quant degrees), so i had only a few choices and wustl was top 3 (princeton, where i couldn't apply, mit, and then wustl. i chose not to apply to vandy, though i know admission there was close to a guarantee). however, i did apply to one quant program - nyu courant - from which i am still waiting to hear.

back to claremont mckenna: i dunno know though. a small class, an excellent name for undergrad, great alumni, and a newly launched program whose success is extremely important for the overall college brand (+ good scholarships, ridiculous commitment to recruiting, etc) and you might have a decent program...I look at the UCLA MFE...when it came out people at schools like Baruch (wtf?) were ridiculing it as Anderson's attempt at establishing a(nother) cash cow, the quality of students they would attract, the fact that they had to extend their application deadline by several months because of "overwhelming demand" (baruch guys said it was no more than a failing program's open admission of a total lack of interest from qualified candidates). And how did the UCLA MFE place its first class in internships...? > I'll let you do the research. (btw compare your findings to similar degrees though, not fin phds from wharton/econ phds from chicago/harvard mba's). for the first class of a new program at a state school, you'll find they did very well. that's the power of a brand (anderson = top notch for finance) and a system committed to the success of the program. there are multiple similar examples...

@pussinboots: bud some people are interested in actually learning concrete shit at the master's level, and not just getting a(nother) shot at recruiting / a decent name on their resume. i have to wonder at how much you'll actually learn at duke/uva in mba lite...

 
islandoffmorocco:

@pussinboots: bud some people are interested in actually learning concrete shit at the master's level, and not just getting a(nother) shot at recruiting / a decent name on their resume. i have to wonder at how much you'll actually learn at duke/uva in mba lite...

as with most regular MBA programs, you will learn absolutely nothing

 

Wow, nothing like coming back to the forums to see this topic go to complete shit.

@PussInBoots - I generally respect and agree with most of your posts, but you are obvious biased towards Duke since you go there. I go to Villanova, but regularly advise people to go to other schools or not get an MSF at all. Telling people that Duke and UVA are the 2 best places is complete BS. Duke has an amazing brand, but the MMS is in its infant stages, very expensive and unproven. If you want a Duke diploma so bad get a masters in econ or something.

@Humble_Dude - Speak for yourself. Plenty of people in my class are doing IBD and plenty of people in the previous years class are doing IBD. MSF generally places into S&T/IBD/AM.

I always find people who are willing to waste a year of their time and drop 40K for a graduate degree simply to have a schools name on it hilarious. With a little networking and some determination you can get into banking from about any school. Yes, probably not Goldman Sachs or a BB, but you can easily get into a variety of MM banks. Get some experience, network and go elsewhere.

A MSF degree is about your desire to learn more about finance and still give yourself plenty of options. The top 10-15 MBA is still on the table, you could go into academics, you could go into AM because of the CFA materials, you could go into S&T and you could have another shot at IBD. All of the schools I regularly mention (Villanova, BC, Vanderbilt) all have great alumni presence and while not a "target" school are most diffidently not a "non target" when it comes to OCR and alumni presence.

I realize that the average age of posters on here is 20-22, but it is never to late to try and be objective, mature and rational. Holy crap, tons of people read this stuff and try and base their decision to do XYZ because a lot of the views expressed. If you want to spew worthless crap and un-factual opinion why don't you fire up your PS3 and take crap to kids across the globe while playing moder warfare or something.

 
Wow, nothing like coming back to the forums to see this topic go to complete shit.

@PussInBoots - I generally respect and agree with most of your posts, but you are obvious biased towards Duke since you go there. I go to Villanova, but regularly advise people to go to other schools or not get an MSF at all. Telling people that Duke and UVA are the 2 best places is complete BS. Duke has an amazing brand, but the MMS is in its infant stages, very expensive and unproven. If you want a Duke diploma so bad get a masters in econ or something.

@Humble_Dude - Speak for yourself. Plenty of people in my class are doing IBD and plenty of people in the previous years class are doing IBD. MSF generally places into S&T/IBD/AM.

I always find people who are willing to waste a year of their time and drop 40K for a graduate degree simply to have a schools name on it hilarious. With a little networking and some determination you can get into banking from about any school. Yes, probably not Goldman Sachs or a BB, but you can easily get into a variety of MM banks. Get some experience, network and go elsewhere.

A MSF degree is about your desire to learn more about finance and still give yourself plenty of options. The top 10-15 MBA is still on the table, you could go into academics, you could go into AM because of the CFA materials, you could go into S&T and you could have another shot at IBD. All of the schools I regularly mention (Villanova, BC, Vanderbilt) all have great alumni presence and while not a "target" school are most diffidently not a "non target" when it comes to OCR and alumni presence.

I realize that the average age of posters on here is 20-22, but it is never to late to try and be objective, mature and rational. Holy crap, tons of people read this stuff and try and base their decision to do XYZ because a lot of the views expressed. If you want to spew worthless crap and un-factual opinion why don't you fire up your PS3 and take crap to kids across the globe while playing moder warfare or something.

1) Then why are you doing an MSF? 2) Do you have any previous IBD experience? 3) I agree, I don't think anyone should do it for just the brand name, especially if you have to pay 40-72k (MIT's cost) of aftertax money and forgo 1 year of investment banking experience. Brand name is important though. Friends at the better Ivies, Wharton, etc regularly land positions with little or no ibanking experience. Even though I have some experience, I find myself getting asked why me over a Wharton/Harvard student with no experience whatsoever. Stupid, but people tend to blindly connect brand name with intellect and work capacity.

 
@PussInBoots - I generally respect and agree with most of your posts, but you are obvious biased towards Duke since you go there. I go to Villanova, but regularly advise people to go to other schools or not get an MSF at all. Telling people that Duke and UVA are the 2 best places is complete BS. Duke has an amazing brand, but the MMS is in its infant stages, very expensive and unproven. If you want a Duke diploma so bad get a masters in econ or something.

You are definitely correct, sorry for not a clear post.

What I meant to say is, at UVA/Duke student will not learn anything too crazy or outside of Advisory Banking. I'd love to go to Princeton MFin, but it's rediculously quant, and my GPA will suffer greatly because I'll be in class with mostly wanna-be-traders. I will not enjoy subjects I'll be studying.

Villanova/Vandebilt/Washington U in St. Louis offer practically same placement for their master's, but programs are too heavy. If someone wants to challenge themselves academically, then it's a perfect match. Personally, My GPA went to shit (from 3.94 to 3.6x) after I realized that everything I learned is basically useless (as pathetic as it sounds). I double majored in Math/Econ, so I'd like to spend more time studying accounting/management/corporate finance.

One thing that sucks about any master's program is that it definitely lowers chances of getting into HBS. HBS is known for having a young average age (25/26). I will be 27 after 4 years of FT (4 years banking, or 2/2 banking/something else).

 

@

MSF generally places into S&T/IBD/AM.

MOSTLY S&T/AM. Look at the top MSF programs in US, there are not that many but the general consensus is that the top three are programs at MIT, Princeton and WashU. I don't know about MIT but Princeton and WashU generally place students to quant positions.

The MBA is still the degree of choice for the corporate finance divisions and mergers and acquisitions areas of the modern investment bank, but the MFin degree is becoming the preferred degree in the trading and Asset Management areas of the I-bank. These would be areas such as quantitative asset management, risk management, derivatives pricing and trading, fixed income analytics and other areas where the pricing and analysis of complex securities require significant quantitative input.

This is from Princeton MSF website and it generally speaks for the overall placement focus of MSF programs.

Look, man... If Villanova MSF places well into IBD and if that is what you want to do, good for you. It's good that you have confidence in your choice (I am still deciding what program I should go as of now, so I envy you). There is no need to rage when you see opinions that are different from yours expressed on the forum, unless they are indeed un-factual like you said. I generally post with caution and I don't write without doing relevant research beforehand.

 

@PussInBoots, no worries man, I am a fan of your posts so it is all good. I personally think you are short changing yourself. You strike me as a rather smart fellow.

@ Affirmative - I love your hate for MBA's ha. I think that a MBA used to be a great idea back in the day when people used to go into leadership roles with the degree. For some odd reason investment banking adopted the MBA as the holy grail. I tend to be pro America most of the time, but on this issue I have to side with the Brits and Continental Europe.

I remember years ago when I went to London for a school trip and we were speaking with a guy from Lloyd's of London and I asked him about how people got jobs there, progressed, etc. The way he described it really sounded like the way Wall Street used to be. More of an apprenticeship than anything else. The MSc is huge across the Atlantic and I wonder when it will truly catch on here. Especially since the complexity of finance has increased so much recently.

Anyway, I think the MSF degree can be summed up as a challenging way to increase your understanding and knowledge of finance, but not a required level of understanding for a career in IB. The degree offers you another chance at recruiting, another chance to network and potentially a better name brand

 
@PussInBoots, no worries man, I am a fan of your posts so it is all good. I personally think you are short changing yourself. You strike me as a rather smart fellow.

@ Affirmative - I love your hate for MBA's ha. I think that a MBA used to be a great idea back in the day when people used to go into leadership roles with the degree. For some odd reason investment banking adopted the MBA as the holy grail. I tend to be pro America most of the time, but on this issue I have to side with the Brits and Continental Europe.

I remember years ago when I went to London for a school trip and we were speaking with a guy from Lloyd's of London and I asked him about how people got jobs there, progressed, etc. The way he described it really sounded like the way Wall Street used to be. More of an apprenticeship than anything else. The MSc is huge across the Atlantic and I wonder when it will truly catch on here. Especially since the complexity of finance has increased so much recently.

Anyway, I think the MSF degree can be summed up as a challenging way to increase your understanding and knowledge of finance, but not a required level of understanding for a career in IB. The degree offers you another chance at recruiting, another chance to network and potentially a better name brand

i don't hate MBAs per se, i think they can be very helpful for people who want to go into leadership positions at large corporations or who want to engineer a complete career change. i just hate when MBAs pretend to be academic degrees or when MBA graduates pretend like the degree was challenging.

if somebody really wants to specialize in finance they should get an MSc finance in Europe, where MScs are the norm, or get a PhD in finance. at least that way you might learn something, in addition to becoming marketable for top jobs.

 

MIT and Princeton are MFin degrees. Masters in Financial Math place mainly into S&T. Villanova, Vanderbilt, BC, U Wash are all MSF degrees which place in various fields.

I am sure you do your research, but to miss a something so fundamental as a MSF vs MFin is a big deal.

 

@pussinboots: dude what did you mean by?

"Villanova/Vandebilt/Washington U in St. Louis offer practically same placement for their master's, but programs are too heavy."

You mean that these three programs are equivalent? Or did you mean these programs place like xyz other programs? (In which case, what was the xyz point of comparison?)

 

yeah humble that seems to be a general trend. the good thing for chinese students is that they do seem to have decent domestic demand for Western educated grads on the mainland, and great access to some of the financial centers of the Pacific Rim such as Hong Kong and Singapore. International students from some other countries might not be that lucky. I am hoping to differentiate myself since my undergrad is also from the US, and I have some relevant work experience, including a year's worth in the US. Don't know. It's an uphill struggle, but am hoping for the best.

Am really hoping for the NYU admission...that's a stretch though.

 

Anyone that tells you an MSF will further your career is dead wrong (note this is for non-quant careers).

1) It will help you in interviews! No. Everything you need to know is in vault / wso guides. 2) It will help you succeed on the job! No. Everything you need to know you will learn whether through formal training program, or on the job.

What an MSF WILL DO is give you another shot at recruiting. The better the brand name and alumni network, the easier recruiting is. Thus, pick the best brand name.

Curriculum and rankings don't mean shit when it comes to recruiting - the brand name is what matters. Buy that brand. Why do you think so many Ivy League lib arts majors in IB? They have that brand name.

Goal of school = getting a job. Don't shoot yourself in the foot by passing on a program because it new or MBA lite. Have a reason for going there and network.

__________________________ if you ain't first, you last
 
Barbarian:
Anyone that tells you an MSF will further your career is dead wrong (note this is for non-quant careers).

1) It will help you in interviews! No. Everything you need to know is in vault / wso guides. 2) It will help you succeed on the job! No. Everything you need to know you will learn whether through formal training program, or on the job.

What an MSF WILL DO is give you another shot at recruiting. The better the brand name and alumni network, the easier recruiting is. Thus, pick the best brand name.

Curriculum and rankings don't mean shit when it comes to recruiting - the brand name is what matters. Buy that brand. Why do you think so many Ivy League lib arts majors in IB? They have that brand name.

Goal of school = getting a job. Don't shoot yourself in the foot by passing on a program because it new or MBA lite. Have a reason for going there and network.

I agree with you up to your last point. I wouldn't recommend trying out a brand new MSF program with a good brand name like Duke/UVA. Not enough info is out there about these two to gauge recruiting prospects.

 
Barbarian:
Anyone that tells you an MSF will further your career is dead wrong (note this is for non-quant careers).

Barbarian, you are partially right and wrong.

Grad school is completely different from undergrad. Level of maturity of a [4 year undergrad + 1 year grad] student is significantly higher than [5 year undergrad] just because the expectations are much higher in grad school. Grad school vs undergrad is like undergrad vs high schools.

Sure, students can enroll in a 1 year grad school, go through FT recruitment, get an offer, use same study-exam-forget undergrad mindset to get 4.0, and get the fuck out. I am not paying $60,000+ for that.

Skills that MFin/MSF provide can be extremely useful in MM IB, where Analysts have a significantly higher level of responsibility.

 
noke2012:
futurectdoc:
kc2siq:
Thanks for the list, but if you have time, can you also give a broad description of each tier and what separates the tiers since I feel like it gets blurry at the bottom half?

Tier 1, Full buy and sell side recruiting, national presence. Tier 1A More regional and less buy side recruiting. Tier 1B Regional, less BB presence, more MM and boutique. Tier 2 F500 becomes more prominent, placement is almost exclusively regional. Tier 3 F500 predominates, sell side recruitment is limited, mostly through networking. Tier 4 Almost exclusively F500, much more hustling/networking required. Tier 5 Institutions that are very regional in placement, networking is essential.

Tiers 4 and 5 are blurry, they are all very regional and if you want F500 or IB you need to network.

If this is the case, then I don't understand UVA's ranking. We've had multiple buyside firms recruit OCR, from random hedgefunds, asset managers, etc. For I-banking, we've had pretty much all of the firms except goldman sachs and morgan stanley in addition to a ton of middle market and boutiques. Also, Bain, McKinsey, and Accenture + a ton of other consulting firms were on campus and I have classmates who have offers from both Bain and McKinsey. For trading, all of the top prop shops had resume drops and a couple came on campus. The only weak point was sell side S&T.

Couple people in my program who did Vandy undergrad and they came here because the recruiting at Vandy sucked.

just my 2 cents.

Just to clarify, you're referring to OCR accessible to MS students and not just OCR accessible to McIntire undergrads, correct?
 
Thurnis Haley:
noke2012:
futurectdoc:
kc2siq:
Thanks for the list, but if you have time, can you also give a broad description of each tier and what separates the tiers since I feel like it gets blurry at the bottom half?

Tier 1, Full buy and sell side recruiting, national presence. Tier 1A More regional and less buy side recruiting. Tier 1B Regional, less BB presence, more MM and boutique. Tier 2 F500 becomes more prominent, placement is almost exclusively regional. Tier 3 F500 predominates, sell side recruitment is limited, mostly through networking. Tier 4 Almost exclusively F500, much more hustling/networking required. Tier 5 Institutions that are very regional in placement, networking is essential.

Tiers 4 and 5 are blurry, they are all very regional and if you want F500 or IB you need to network.

If this is the case, then I don't understand UVA's ranking. We've had multiple buyside firms recruit OCR, from random hedgefunds, asset managers, etc. For I-banking, we've had pretty much all of the firms except goldman sachs and morgan stanley in addition to a ton of middle market and boutiques. Also, Bain, McKinsey, and Accenture + a ton of other consulting firms were on campus and I have classmates who have offers from both Bain and McKinsey. For trading, all of the top prop shops had resume drops and a couple came on campus. The only weak point was sell side S&T.

Couple people in my program who did Vandy undergrad and they came here because the recruiting at Vandy sucked.

just my 2 cents.

Just to clarify, you're referring to OCR accessible to MS students and not just OCR accessible to McIntire undergrads, correct?

There is no difference between the two. All undergrad, grad, and regular UVA students have access to the main OCR recruiting portal, which all of those firms I mentioned fall under. Also, undergrad and grad McIntire students have access to another recruiting portal that is exclusive to just McIntire, so non-McIntire undergrads are excluded.

"Life all comes down to a few moments. This is one of them." - Bud Fox
 

This is a pretty interesting MSF list. Claremont McKenna (Spelling?) is west coast, has decent alumni.

Out of your list UVA's commerce degree looks the best. I think the school has a great reputation and the MS in Commerce is easy enough to understand. They have different admission requirements so make sure you are able to apply.

Can you give more information, stats, GMAT, whatever. Also, you mention you are looking at NY/Chicago/LA. These schools are kind of an odd pick. No Vanderbilt or BC?

 

I know most of the people seeking advice on this forum have GPA's above 3.5, gmat scores of 700+ and so on , so obviously their questions pertain to T10 MSF programs. I ended up with a 2.75, have not yet taken my GMAT (Can probably pull off a 660-680) and majored in Economics with minors in Finance and Geography. Also played on my college's soccer team, volunteered, stock market,finance clubs and so on... Low GPA due to just college being such a huge change for me, didn't find my grove until last 2 years and ended senior year with a 3.25 I know, I know - Most of you will tell me to take additional classes, get work experience and all that. Can't do...got to get my MSF and hope for another round of recruiting.

Claremont McKenna told me its a loooong shot but if I score around 720 they would consider my application. We'll see.

Anthony, No BC or Vanderbilt because my chances of getting in are none probably. I am perfectly fine with a regionally competitve school. NYC,LA and all that can come after a few years of work and proving myself. Thanks for your opinion.

" A recession is when other people lose their job, a depression is when you lose your job. "
 

Take your GMAT and see what you score. If you get high 600's it can probably offset a low GPA. Also, might want to break down your class grades. If you show a steady improvement and decent scores in math, etc it will make a difference. Send me a PM when you get a chance.

 

All my finance minor classes except one, I got A's in (I never bought books in college, because I had no money for them and because I couldn't have a job while being a part of the soccer team. It was a 30 hour weekly committment in addition to schoolwork and fitness centre training. I'll shoot a message your way tomorrow when I'm a little less busy, but I appreciate your honest opinion.

" A recession is when other people lose their job, a depression is when you lose your job. "
 

I think ranking is pointless (as can be seen from my previous thread, good answers were provided as to why it shouldn't be done) but since people keep asking what the reputation for a certain program is, I arranged some of the schools into tiers;

Tier 1: Princeton MIT WUSTL

Tier 2: Duke Boston College UVA Villanova Claremont Mckenna UIUC Vanderbilt

Tier 3: University of Florida Johns Hopkins University of Rochester Brandeis

Tier 4: Tulane LSU Syracuse Purdue Baruch

Tier5: Everything else

 
insight123:
I think ranking is pointless (as can be seen from my previous thread, good answers were provided as to why it shouldn't be done) but since people keep asking what the reputation for a certain program is, I arranged some of the schools into tiers;

Tier 1: Princeton MIT WUSTL

Tier 2: Duke Boston College UVA Villanova Claremont Mckenna UIUC Vanderbilt

Tier 3: University of Florida Johns Hopkins University of Rochester Brandeis

Tier 4: Tulane LSU Syracuse Purdue Baruch

Tier5: Everything else

Very much agree with this ranking and post. I would like to clarify a little though if I may. I would be wary of putting Princeton up there. It is obviously the best graduate finance program, but it is more towards the MFin area than a pure MSF. If you are going to include computational finance programs in the mix than I think CMU would be a tier 1 school also.

Another thing anyone looking into a MSF degree has to consider is how the program is structured. Many MSF programs are simply add ons to an MBA program. Syracuse for example is mentioned, but no one gets just an MSF degree, it is always a joint MBA/MSF degree. Personally, I would switch tier 3 and tier 4 since the tier 4 schools have dedicated programs (with the exception of SU)

Whenever you are looking at a school make sure you call the program up and see if there is a separate program and recruiting. Also try and find out the school breakdown. I think it is beneficial when the MSF program has no more than 25% same school admissions. What I mean is you don't want to go to an MSF program where everyone there went to the same school for UG. You want to increase your network.

 
insight123:
I think ranking is pointless (as can be seen from my previous thread, good answers were provided as to why it shouldn't be done) but since people keep asking what the reputation for a certain program is, I arranged some of the schools into tiers;

Tier 1: Princeton MIT WUSTL

Tier 2: Duke Boston College UVA Villanova Claremont Mckenna UIUC Vanderbilt

Tier 3: University of Florida Johns Hopkins University of Rochester Brandeis

Tier 4: Tulane LSU Syracuse Purdue Baruch

Tier5: Everything else

Not sure if I would rank Baruch under tier 4 if we're talking about MFE... (don't think Baruch has a MSF program, does it?) Anyway, Baruch seems to have strong placement stats http://mfe.baruch.cuny.edu/employment-stats

Also, UofM also has a MFE program, but I'm not sure where it would fall tier 1 through 4.

 
insight123:

I think ranking is pointless (as can be seen from my previous thread, good answers were provided as to why it shouldn't be done) but since people keep asking what the reputation for a certain program is, I arranged some of the schools into tiers;

Tier 1:
Princeton
MIT
WUSTL

Tier 2:
Duke
Boston College
UVA
Villanova
Claremont Mckenna
UIUC
Vanderbilt

Tier 3:
University of Florida
Johns Hopkins
University of Rochester
Brandeis

Tier 4:
Tulane
LSU
Syracuse
Purdue
Baruch

Tier5:
Everything else

Where do you think these programs would come in this list?

George Washington The University of Chicago Texas A&M University: Mays Business School Carnegie Mellon Tepper Texas St. Austin: McCombs

 

Since i saw university of Kansas on there i thought i would comment.

I contacted them about a year ago about their MSF Program and the admin told me the usually only accept 1 person a year for their program...sounds suspect.

 

Yeah, I agree. Good list, I think it is pretty solid. Non MBA masters category is pretty interesting. A lot of really good schools have MS in Financial Engineering, but those programs tend to be housed out of the engineering school vs business school. UCLA and NYU have Fin Engineering programs.

MSF used to be pretty much a pre PhD degree. Many programs still have hints of this academic past. A lot of them are simply money grabs also.

 

I'm not saying this in contradiction, rather in ignorance and incredulity, but is WUSTL really a tier 1 program!? To be honest, they were totally off my radar. I thought they were a regional power house at best, but never imagined them ranking with Princeton and MIT.

Can someone give me a bit of reasoning as to why they're so respected? Recruiting? Network? Coursework/faculty? Selectivity? etc. What's their placement like?

"If you can count your money, you don't have a billion dollars." - J. Paul Getty
 
San Franciscan:
I'm not saying this in contradiction, rather in ignorance and incredulity, but is WUSTL really a tier 1 program!? To be honest, they were totally off my radar. I thought they were a regional power house at best, but never imagined them ranking with Princeton and MIT.

Can someone give me a bit of reasoning as to why they're so respected? Recruiting? Network? Coursework/faculty? Selectivity? etc. What's their placement like?

WUSTL Job Placement:

http://www.olin.wustl.edu/docs/WCC/EmploymentSpecializedMasters.pdf

You can decide for yourself but it looks pretty darn good to me. Some other stats: 1) 88% placed 3-months post-graduation, 100% 6-months post-graduation (stats have been consistent for the past 5 years the program has existed).

The program received 1102 applications for 60 spots this year. I don't know the acceptance rate for the program - it's probably around 15-20% though (similar to other WUSTL programs).

Class profile for 2010 graduating class was 3.57 avg. GPA, 729 avg. GMAT. Pretty impressive.

Conclusion? I think it's a pretty great program.

 

Well, in all fairness, if WUSTL is going to be moved so should MIT. Their program is brand new and other than a phenomenal name is pretty unproven.

I think as far as MSF programs go they really live or die off the name of their school or MBA program. Olin is ranked pretty well so I think that helps the program out. Plus it has been around for a bit and is a little more quantitative than other MSF programs.

 

WUSTL is probably better than all of the tier 2 schools. To be honest I think WUSTL and MIT deserve their own tier (like tier 1.5 or something). Neither program can even remotely compete with Princeton BC Princeton is clearly the hardest to get into and has phenomenal placement (comparable to M7 MBAs). MIT has no placement history and might be milking the Sloan name with this $100K MSF program. WUSTL is clearly better than the tier 2 schools mentioned (better class profile, better placement, etc.) but is no where close to Princeton. I think the clear indicator of this is the fact that no one would turn down Princeton MSF for WUSTL or MIT.

 
bcbunker1:
the pay from wash u seems quite low...60+10 after a masters? cant undergrads get that level of pay?

AnthonyD already addressed this but he is correct. 90+% of the students in the MSF program have 0-1 year of work experience. Typically these students will place at the analyst or advanced entry level position in various companies. Much different from Princeton where over half the class has 3+ years work exp or a masters/phd before entering the program. I think that accounts for the difference in compensation.

 

I noticed that also, but if you consider the fact that a) a good portion of people go into corp fin @ F500 companies and b) most MSF places in an analyst role then that figure seems about right. Without any work experience people are going to place at that level, especially at middle market firms.

BC ---- at Princeton are the people getting associate roles experience or unexperienced. PM if you can

 

I really wonder if analysts went into a MSF program would they be able to come out as associates. I mean if you wanted to stay in banking and had 2 years is the MBA really necessary or is it just a matter of a masters.

 

Some interesting comments here, and I realize for many of your, this is just reiteration of whats going on because seems like everday someone new joins and asks the same general questions. My apologies, but I thank you for at least responding.

Its interesting that Kansas only accepted 1 student a year into their MSF program. For me, it just boils down to which school, whether its my list that I included or some other one from tier 4/5 , would I have the chance with getting a job after graduation. I saw Brandeis mentioned as a tier 4 school but it seems like its mainly a PT program aimed at the working population rather than students coming from UG. I just want to know which of those schools mentioned, would (even if its a remotely small chance, but leads in that particular group of schools in that category) guarantee decent recruiting. Any specific ideas and why? I was told Denver is pretty good in that region, but not sure as how they compare to the other schools in my list.

" A recession is when other people lose their job, a depression is when you lose your job. "
 
islandoffmorocco:
yeah nelly that's what i'm talking about son!

tier 1.5 for life haha

dude where did you get that 1102 applications stat...that is damn high! thanking my stars as i write this.

side note - in my humble opinion, mit will do well and is probably worth the price.

Haha thanks for the glowing appraisal island. Idk if my opinion is worth shit, but that is how I feel about the Olin and MIT programs ~ definitely "tier 1.5".

Those application numbers came straight from the horse's mouth ~ the director of the MSF program at WashU. I think you know who I am talking about, most of the people that made it into the program have probably spoken to him at least once (but I don't want to throw out his name on a public forum). I was shocked myself when he told me during my visit, I had to ask him again just to make sure he didn't say "102" instead of "1102". Makes you feel special doesn't it island? haha.

 

I went to a school in NY and lived there for 4.5 years. I live in Toronto, Canada and have dual citizenship from Canada and Poland (EU member).

Not to bring up an old post or anything, but I decided against going to any of these schools I mentioned because I already have such a difficult road ahead of myself, that attending one of these MSF programs would only make things worse from every angle. I'm aiming for a good European MSF program or something along the lines of Villanova, U of Rochester for Plan-B, if I don't get accepted in Europe. I don't even want to think about that though, I've had enough of not being given a chance and overcoming shit all my life. I guess it starts with preparation and giving yourself a good shot and that's what I intend on doing.

" A recession is when other people lose their job, a depression is when you lose your job. "
 

Toronto has a solid MSF program as well as a HEC Montreal. I would focus on the top UK programs, a couple Canadian programs and maybe a handful of US schools. I think that should keep your application costs down and give you an idea of where you stand. All will have different benefits and negatives.

 

UT Austin is a top MSF program.

GWU, Texas A&M are both regional programs. Good, but if you can get in somewhere else you might consider it.

Chicago and CMU are both MFE programs and not applicable to MSF rankings. Both are top MFE programs though.

 
Smooth_Nico:
Cass > Bocconi> St. Gallen> Warwick

Look at FT Rankings for European Business Schools

from your previous posts i know you are a cass troll and you hopelessly cling to FT rankings (b/c ECSP is the best school in Europe right?) and you can't be reasoned with.

to the OP, if you want to do investment banking in London there are a host of schools (like st gallen and bocconi) that are better than cass. TBH, getting an MSc Finance from any school other than LSE, Oxford, Cambridge, HEC, Bocconi, St. Gallen, RSM and Warwick will put you at a disadvantage to banking recruiting.

 

MSc Europe:

LSE, Oxford, Cambridge Bocconi, HEC, St. Gallen, Warwick Mannheim, WHU, RSM, SSE CBS, ESADE, Maastricht, ESCP, plus some more in UK (Imperial etc.) and France (ESSEC etc.) Cass, Vienna, Solvay plus few in Germany (LMU etc)

I am sorry but speaking to a BB grad recruiter, he listed around 5 target unis in the UK also mentioning Cass at first, but then adding "although Cass not so much..."

note: some of these programs might not be pure MsFs, nevertheless, they are targeted by banks

 

I wrote this elsewhere but currently University College Dublin has a higher ranked MBA program and their MSc Finance program is also very good as well. However, Trinity College Dublin is more respected in industry whether you are looking at investment banking, consulting, or big4 accounting. Their MBA program is not highly ranked at the moment but they are building a state of the art business program and infrastructure and are completely redoing their business program offering at undergrad and postgrad level which is set to be completed by 2019. With that, they have on board well respected professors and researchers, with funding being pumped into their business school. It will only be a matter of time before Trinity's MBA program surpasses UCD's offering. Their MSc in Finance is well respected in London as well. Regardless, Trinity at a undergrad level is target school for IB, Asset Management, and consulting but they are also building up their rep at a postgrad level too. Their reputation and prestige has always surpassed UCD's and recently UCD at a postgrad level has challenged that but with Trinity turning their focusing to their postgrad offering, particularly their MBA over the last few years look for them to begin to jump the rankings very quickly in the coming years. Trinity also has a very extensive network whether you are looking at London, New York, Boston, or San Francisco, which also speaks volumes to its international reputation. The rankings may not look as favorably at Trinity at the moment but industry and academia circles do place it above UCD.

 

I know someone who went to Cass for the MSc in Banking and cannot find a job.

The guy is obviously a Cass moron who wants his school to gain recognition, because he cannot find a job.

Stay away from Cass if you have a choice, but saying that, the person I know didnt network at all so who knows maybe he would have gotten a job.

St Gallen > Cass by a country mile

Imperial > Cass

Cass > Bath

And I'm British so I know

 

Facere rerum laborum recusandae ullam et. Soluta aut perferendis id omnis consequuntur perferendis quibusdam. Repellat porro nemo quisquam rerum qui.

 

Ex rerum et et at qui. Dolores ex reiciendis vel id nemo praesentium sapiente. Quia provident ipsam vel aut. Excepturi et modi et totam.

Ex consequuntur sed sit. Temporibus et voluptatem rem aspernatur quod et voluptatem. Nulla dicta id aut consequuntur totam quo. Sed enim iusto et et omnis aut. Velit expedita id minus sit sunt omnis ea et.

Corporis cum sunt et quia minus. Voluptas impedit rerum tempora maiores veniam distinctio totam.

Nisi sit quibusdam rerum minus quos. Quas et dolorum atque et rerum possimus quis.

 

Neque iste qui velit recusandae non officia quia. Dolores magnam sunt aut enim voluptatem. Eum labore est saepe molestias amet eligendi. A enim dolorem doloremque nemo repellat reiciendis est.

Nulla occaecati exercitationem in fugit maiores veritatis eveniet. Itaque ut sit consequatur adipisci incidunt deserunt magni ea. Itaque quo qui fugiat et voluptatibus voluptates non veritatis. Tempora magnam aspernatur sed. Repellendus ducimus ea eum reprehenderit qui et necessitatibus. Consequatur maxime consequatur exercitationem quis et nihil velit.

Eum vel quo sed eos ut. Labore recusandae mollitia et ea ut et esse. Voluptatem voluptatem quia sint autem. Illum asperiores consectetur quo minima nulla in eum voluptatem. Quia nihil sint fuga.

 

Ut repellat ex accusantium et sunt. Et ratione qui qui voluptatum autem. Tempora quasi reiciendis cupiditate distinctio consequatur veritatis autem harum. Asperiores et enim et quasi nesciunt provident est eaque. Qui modi sit alias.

At doloribus id nemo. Aperiam dolorem dolorum in omnis delectus labore. Accusantium dolorem itaque aut eveniet. Non error alias corporis explicabo a quis.

Tempore ipsam occaecati non voluptatibus reiciendis rem esse eos. Pariatur a qui quos id eos aliquid voluptatem doloribus. Dolorem beatae velit consequatur molestias porro tempora.

 

Voluptatem quia dolor sint et. Nesciunt et nihil perspiciatis ab et porro. Nulla ut amet magni autem eos illo incidunt. Eligendi illum ut laboriosam accusantium. Fugit pariatur commodi voluptas neque sint officia adipisci. Rem deleniti ipsam perspiciatis eligendi debitis et quaerat rerum.

Neque ut consequatur perspiciatis non. Nisi ab est in illum eos qui dolores. Nesciunt voluptatem molestiae nam et corrupti cupiditate. Ratione praesentium reprehenderit ut maxime iure dicta.

Expedita quis est mollitia consequatur. Labore hic dolores voluptatem vel. Sed inventore quia tenetur et perferendis.

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
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
6
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
numi's picture
numi
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...”