Do SAT Scores really matter?
From my short time on this site (about a week) there seems to be multiple mentions of SAT scores. While I understand them for maybe undergrad internships, why do some companies ask for SAT scores outside of internships? Also, the SAT score they focus on is usually Math correct?
SAT scores don't really matter. Sometimes a really high SAT score might look good but unless its unusually low (Math and Reading) it really doesn't make a difference in anyone's eyes.
I've got 2390. Should I include this in my resume?
I find that it is a decent indicator of intelligence, more so than gpa.
Really. You're SAT scores...You mean the test that requires some mundane math skills and has been memorized to the hilt by chinese students. Test is a joke, if anyone says they care about it it's most likely an extra filter just to keep resume reading to a minimum.
.
Like the comments above. No, it doesn't matter.
I'm going to contradict the majority here and say YES, it actually does matter in my experience. Aside from having it on my resume (still do - and you should too unless it sucks) I was asked specifically by my former boss when interviewing what my score was and what the breakdown was between Math and Reading or whatever the other one was called. I know there's 3 sections now so things might be a little different. They mostly want to know how you did on Math is my guess.
It's never gonna make or break you, but I definitely wouldn't say it doesn't matter. I still have my ACT and SAT on my resume, but nothing else from high school obviously. So it's important enough.
I would also say it matters, especially for consulting. I've had MBB partners during a final round comment (positively) on my math score. Consulting firms out of undergrad specifically require your SAT score, and I know they are used as another data point to evaluate candidates.
There are two ways to look at it:
It's well known that you can improve your score with a lot of prep, so SATs are meaningless since it doesn't mean you're smart.
It's well known that you can improve your score with a lot of prep, so SATs mean a lot since it shows that you're either a) smart enough to get that score on your own or b) put the time in that you had to to get a great score.
I think it's #2, so I think they're important.
Will it hold you back if your scores are low though? For BB firms? Even if you go to a target
My impression was that the majority of people don't put their SAT on their resume anyway, unless it's extremely high.
That said, some people might look at SAT since it's a very simple (not necessarily appropriate or useful) way to compare applicants - it's something everyone has been through (whereas GPAs and course difficulty can vary due to school/major).
You can argue til you're blue in the face about whether the test is a good measure of one's expected performance on the job. The reality is that some people care and others don't care. At a bare minimum, most employers tend to at least collect the data. Obviously you want your score to be as high as possible, but by the time you're applying or jobs, there isn't much you can do to change it. Roll on and focus on other parts of your application.
The thing is, sure there are a bunch of stupid people who do well on the test. However, it still works pretty well as a filter. I don't know a single intelligent person (including those with ADHD, dyslexia, test anxiety problems) who scored below a 2200 on the first SAT practice test they took. And most of them can get it up to 2300+ with practice. So I feel like it's more of a warning signal to resume readers if you have like, and 1800 on the SAT, but once you're in a certain range I feel like it wouldn't make that much of a difference.
98.6%. You're right only on WSO can someone say, people aren't smart because they can't score over 2200..ridiculous.
God, I'm old. I took it when 1600 was perfect and have no idea WTF a 2390 is.
I know people working in BB's with sub 2000s. SAT is shitty indicator. I know someone who got a perfect reading/writing on ACT and couldn't hit 700 in either on SAT...
No correlation to success and it's been proven time after time. It only measures right brained intelligence and doesn't take into account creativity, communication skill, etc. If math skill was the #1 success indicator, asians would be on the cusp of world domination...but they're not
I think BeastMode nailed it though with his #2
I find this pretty ridiculous because SAT scores are taken in fucking high school. The math on it is a fucking joke (especially if you're in college with a STEM major) and the verbal section tests you on your knowledge of esoteric words that nobody uses or cares about. The way I see it, SAT is a lazy way for employers to filter out the application pool by using info from the distant past. It discriminates against people like me who didn't have their shit straight at age 16. But what can I say, I'm biased. I can also understand that if I had a stack of 1000 resumes for 10 positions where the job isn't exactly rocket science, I might get lazy and use any info I can to filter out applicants.
Has any firm ever asked for proof of their SAT score?
What is the general consensus on retaking the SAT as a college graduate? I had a decent math score, but English and writing can definitely improve. I want to work for MBB through grad school, so will a strong GMAT score replace a poor SAT score? Will employers know that I retook the SAT as a graduate, and if so, will that be a ding against me? Many things to consider here, but the SAT definitely matters in Consulting.
I have good scores. I put them on my resume. I feel like they helped.
If you dont have it on your resume, but put it on the online application(you have to), do analysts looking through these stacks of resumes even know what your score is?
ACT writing and SAT writing are not similar at all... in fact I'd say the higher your ACT writing the worse of a writer you are, from what I've heard from kids who've taken both.
I put my score in my resume and it was brought up as a good thing by two interviewers.
So... apparently, certain PE shops have SAT score cutoffs. Are these cutoffs based on superscored (Best sections taken from multiple exams) or single sitting? I'm debating whether I should retake the SAT before I start college this fall, since my single sitting score sucks.
Hate to say it and I think its ridiculous also since the SAT really isnt that great a measure of intelligence, but the truth is you will probably be asked about them at some point during some recruiting process. For MBB, you will be requested to include them on your resume. So unfortunately if youre going down that path it's one more thing that does get looked at.
The goal is to check your intelligence and make sure minority status or athletics wasnt your ticket into college. Only really low scores (sub 600 on a section) count, and then probably only a ding if combined with a fluff major and borderline gpa, as it probably means you are managing your academic record and it's likely to be inflated.
Not sure if you meant this in your reply or not, but in your reply it comes across as if getting into school as an athlete or a minority is a bad thing. I would say it is to make sure that athletics isn't your ONLY thing, rather than your ticket. Being an athlete in college can be a major plus to your resume.
As for whether or not it matters:
For some reason or another it does matter at certain firms. How much it matters depends on the firm. I have never worked somewhere where it was more than just a data point (similar to a grad school app, look at gpa, resume, SATs, etc)
It's much easier to hire the lacrosse player with a 1450 than it is to hire the football guy with an 1160.
I'll be a Junior next year and have mediocre SAT's (1850ish) should I retake um this summer if I think I can get a higher score?
I think so long as you hit 700+ on every section you can show it... it shows you're a well-rounded person in terms of basic intellectual capacity
I love this post. So scoring 93rd percentile and above on each section shows that you have basic intelligence? If you believe that, then you are an idiot and I don't care if you got a 2400. There are numerous people in positions of power and influence--people who most likely have accomplished things that you are unlikely to reach--who didn't break 1300 or 1400.
Standardized tests primarily measure work ethic and socioeconomic backgrounds. People who study very hard score well and wealthy people use their financial muscle to buy test prep resources. In my high school, the people who ended up with the best scores began prepping in 9th and 10th grade. Some even started prepping for it in 7th grade.
There's a circularity involved. People who got high scores like to think that doing so makes them smart. After all, it can't be because they studied for it for a few years and their parents spent thousands on test prep. That would be bad for the ol' ego. So they look to hire other people who have high scores because "they're smart". In actuality, they hire them because people who have high scores tend to come from affluent areas and have personal networks full of successful people. For an industry like financial services, this background is important. Kids who grow up reading the WSJ and managing stocks that their parents gave them have a significant head start relative to their peers in understanding the business. In a client service business like IBD or relationship businesses like PE, networks are important. They make it easier to get deals done. Exhibit A is President Bush's former dogwalker who got into HBS without an undergraduate degree and now works at a pretty solid PE shop without any banking/consulting experience. http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2006/5/22/bushs-personal-aide-to-enro…. http://www.berkshirepartners.com/bio_gottesman.shtml
^first off: I didn't get a 2400, I got a 'normal' prep school -> ivy league type score, like 96th/97th percentile. Second of all, you are totally misunderstanding my point on this, and clearly you're getting a bit defensive.
What I said was that if you get 700 on all 3 sections you show you have basic / well-rounded intellecutal capacity. In other words, you cannot easily get the 700 on all 3 sections if you're an idiot - or at least I haven't seen it happen.... what I DID NOT WRITE is that if you DON'T get a 700 on all 3 sections then you ARE automatically in idiot / not well rounded... do you understand the difference? Perhaps if you read a bit more carefully in general, you'd be better at "critical reasoning"...
also for the record... i hardly studied at all for the exam before getting above 2200 on the SAT I + SATII writing (the equivalent of today's 2400), so don't assume we all had tutors all day and worked are asses off... I played 3 varsity sports constantly in high school and hardly ever spent time studying any subject.
Watch out guise, we got a badass over here
^you said it.
It depends on what your educational goals are. If you are planning to transfer to a school with lots of competition, then, your test score can be a determining factor when being compared to another student with a similar GPA. And I would assume, the same applies for job applications. Its shows you are going that extra mile to separate yourself from the competition.
Why do SATs matter? (If they do) (Originally Posted: 09/23/2009)
Maybe I'm just jealous because I had an average score (1300, 650 split) but I can't see why SAT would matter on a resume. As long as it doesn't bring my resume down I guess I don't care, but it seems pretty useless as a tool of determining potential employment to me. It looks like most of the people here who fret over it are college students looking for internships, so it could be people just getting worked up for the sake of nothing. But I want to know if there is actually something behind SAT scores when looking for employment, be it an internship or FT.
If I would have known my SATs mattered coming out of college, I would have tried a lot harder than I did.
^ yeah.
It doesn't measure shit, most likely it was at least 4 years or more ago for anyone. Easy way for them to size up people without putting in much effort.
think about it this way though- getting into an ivy league school really depends on what you did at 16 and the name of your school follows you around forever- at least in the finance industry which has a ton of snobs... my last interview I had to explain why I went to such and such school for undergrad, and I'm 30! One guy who screened analyst resumes at my prior employer would throw out any that didn't list a 1500+ on the SAT (before the 2400 scale).
If you're a retard when you're 16, you're likely to be a retard now.
I too think it's dumb that an intelligent, hard working individual with several years of work experience should have to list his SAT score on his resume.
Personally, I wouldn't want anyone with a sub-1300 score. At the very junior level, when all the analysts are doing grunt work, sheer aptitude won't matter a whole lot. But do you really want to groom someone who couldn't even get 2/3rds to 3/4ths of the questions of the SAT right? Come on, the SAT is full of algebra from middle school and "fill in the blank" type questions where half the answers are completely nonsensical. It's a test of APTITUDE, whereas the ACT is a test of how well you learned high school material. Of course, there are certain factors, but if you were a slacker in high school then you should have an outstanding GMAT or GRE to balance out your mediocre SAT score.
If I were more of a condescending douche I might even go as far saying that 1500 should be a cutoff for anyone past the associate level -- but that's a bit ludicrous. Long post short, it's like using CAPM to estimate the required return. They're both flawed in their own ways, but remain simple, effective ways to gauge a single metric.
It may be meant as a standard aptitude test but with the amount of kids spending 200+ hours in paid study groups, private tutors, paying students to take the test for them, I can assure you that it no longer serves that purpose.
I understand what you're saying but life isn't fair and the prep classes don't actually have an effect on test scores.
I tutor the SAT I for a major testing services company and let me tell you -- there are no "tricks", just straight practicing. Most kids won't remember anything you tell them when they get to the test so the best way to boost scores is to trap them in a room for 3 hours and force them to get better at taking the test. Some of the kids are well-off, but most of them are just your average kids. From my experience, it's PRACTICE that brings up test scores, not the actual prep classes themselves. Practice = success. Sound familiar? Obviously, like with everything else in life, the more aptitude you have, the less practice it takes. Life isn't fair, and I don't think any bank will buy the above argument.
If you find your SAT score to be such a detriment I would recommend that you take the GMAT. They're essentially the same type of test.
.
The SAT score should be used to screen. It's the one thing that will not help you, but can hurt you. No one cares if you got a 1550 instead of a 1400. But people sure will care if you got below a 1200.
There have been studies that have shown that it is nearly impossible to improve your score more than 120-140 points. Literally less than 2% do so. It is an exam based on REASONING ABILITY, and that is why it is hard to teach. There are tricks and time-management, test-taking strategies that will most certaintly help, but more often than not, it wont.
We immediately screen people that have scored below 1250. They don't even get to interview. My score is on the lower range of my peers. I got a 1330. 740M/590V. Maybe in the future the cut-off will be 1350, hopefully not!
So should I even put it down on my resume? I guess 1300 isn't that bad, but I was planning on taking the GMAT anyway before school is over, and on some practice tests I have scored above the 90% mark. Either way I still think it's pretty useless, even as a weeding out tool.
so which banks screen SAT scores? I got exactly 1210. 710M/500V should I be worried?
Yes you should be a bit worried. It varies by office... When I worked in banking (NY office) we screened because we could...the LA office didn't care too much. It just depends. In consulting they REALLY care.
"There have been studies that have shown that it is nearly impossible to improve your score more than 120-140 points. Literally less than 2% do so. It is an exam based on REASONING ABILITY, and that is why it is hard to teach. There are tricks and time-management, test-taking strategies that will most certaintly help, but more often than not, it wont."
If someone didn't study/take the test seriously to begin with, they wouldn't have any trouble bringing up their score more than 140 points by studying. It's the people who have studied for months that top out and reach a point where what they score on a certain day is a fairly accurate predictor of their "real" score.
The SAT stopped being an "aptitude" test a long time ago. Since at least the early 90's the two original sections have been a test of vocabulary, algebra, and geometry. So, someone could be smart enough to reason the analogies, but if they didn't spend weeks memorizing the vocabulary words used for the questions, it wouldn't even matter. Anyone of above average intelligence can spend months memorizing a long list of words along with refining their 9th grade math skills to a point where they'd have no trouble getting a 1500+ on the SAT. (And if they want to score high on the writing section, all they need to do is write for length; it doesn't even matter if it's filled with factual errors.)
If anything a company should make you take the GRE or GMAT before applying to them rather than look at your SAT scores because a 22-23 year old can be vastly different than they were at 16-17. A more recent score on a similar test makes a hell of a lot more sense. But when did making sense matter in this world?
Do SAT scores matter? (Originally Posted: 07/16/2012)
I go to a target and have a pretty bad SAT score (1250ish). Have an okay GPA (3.5) and good experience (2 boutique IB internships).
I will be going through SA recruiting in January. How much would this bad SAT score hurt me? Would it come up a lot in interviews or prevent me from getting 1st round interviews?
Is it worth taking the SATs again? I had a better ACT score that got me into a nice school.
No.
/thread
If it's bad, don't put it on there. If it's good, it's up to you.
I have 1400+ but I haven't put it on my resume yet. It's your call.
It's the biggest fucking deal in your entire life.
And honestly, while you're already in college, you considering taking the SAT again?
This is out of 1600 right? Not that 1250/1600 is great, but, if I saw 1250/2400, I'm going to assume you're actually mentally disabled.
The last two places I interviewed for asked me for my math score, for what it's worth. I don't think it's a big deal but mine is still on my resume, but obviously if you don't think it's "good enough" then you don't have to put it. Or if you did particularly well on math maybe just put that...? I don't think it matters too much for most places.
@BlackHat: Were these for HF positions? Or IB as well?
I don't even remember my SAT scores.
SAT Score for Experienced Hires? (Originally Posted: 12/04/2015)
I was just asked my SAT score for a potential opportunity... I haven't taken my SAT's for just about 10 years now, I figured those were completely irrelevant post college. Has anyone else had this asked, for someone with 5+ years of experience? Seems a little elitist if you ask me, but I wasn't sure if this is not that uncommon.. Any thoughts?
I... ummm.... what? Utterly ridiculous and I would think anyone who attached any importance to it at this stage in your particular game is likely not someone you want to work for/with.
Agreed. Unless I was unemployed and desperate for work, I wouldn't even continue the process with those guys (and I did well on the SAT).
Ridiculous to me, but it seems like there are still people out there who care for whatever reason. Although not the exact same experience level, but looking to switch jobs a year or two out of school, I came across a decent amount of job postings asking for it and had one or two apps that specifically required it. I remember having to call up CollegeBoard because I couldn't remember the exact breakdown.
You know, back when SAT equated to an IQ test of sorts and you could submit your score for entry to Mensa and that sort of thing, then I can see that. That was I think pre-'96? Don't quote me. But nowadays it just doesn't make sense. You went to college, you got a degree with X.X GPA, you've been in the field doing the work.... it just seems totally asinine to me. It'd be like asking me what my high school GPA was..... I don't know, who cares? I obviously did well enough to get into the right college and move forward from there, what does it matter? Then again there are plenty of firms that want your GMAT post MBA(through friends I've been told MBB consulting and some BB's) but even that I don't think is useful, but I'm not a consultant. Having taken the GMAT and actually gotten an MBA though I just don't see the relevancy. People get hung up on numbers and prestige. It's stupid. Especially in RE where we all know that soft skills are the best skills.
i've heard of this being asked for pre-mba BUT experienced hires in super-competitive areas like megafund PE where they're screening kids w 2 yrs i-banking experience. keep in mind they are looking at candidates who very well might have gotten like a 1570-1600 SAT. so if you are interviewing w a fund like Goldman's REPIA then it doesn't particularly surprise me (but i agree that it's incredibly douchey).
Can confirm I was asked what my SAT scores were for a Pre-MBA PE position I applied to last year.
Seemed like they were just trying to filter candidates.
Thank you all for the advice! Seems a little too pretentious for me. I just wanted to get some other thoughts on the matter... I wasn't sure if I was being overly offended or not.
I don't mind it, if you went to a non-target and got an awesome score like I did, it proves you have a score in line with a target, helping to alleviate school snobbery.
I have to wonder... what the hell does a 10 year old SAT score mean now that the SAT is out of 2400 as opposed to 1600. Not only that, what does it really matter? 4 years out of college should be irrelevant for the SAT scores.
It makes sense if you are expecting a large number of applicants. Just makes an easy way to filter some of undesirable candidates.
Not in this context. Real estate isn't about raw intellectual horsepower the way, say, investment banking is. You could easily be overlooking the right candidate by using that metric. My boss is literally the smartest person I've ever met in this business--he's f*cking brilliant. I think his SAT score was, like, a 980.
I think we can all agree on a number of items: 1) Asking for SAT scores for a position that also requires 5+ years of relevant work experience is obnoxious, 2) SAT scores are wildly imperfect as a predictor for intelligence, let alone ability to analyze/underwrite/transact on commercial real estate, 3) All other things equal, a candidate who got a 1400+ on his/her SAT is probably smarter than the candidate who got a 1000, 4) Asking for the score is an easy way to filter people who look similar on paper, and both passed a phone screen without saying anything stupid.
SAT will matter forever, my SAT will be on my tombstone
Lol love how this year old thread has been revived. I can confirm, even for pure CRE/Resi positions that ive seen at 'megafunds', that SAT scores are asked for and I would imagine that they matter to an extent.
I can also confirm (as I am sure that you all have seen for yourself) that I have met some of the smartest and also some of the dumbest people (on job) with really high SAT scores.
Taking the SAT's/ACT (Originally Posted: 05/29/2008)
So I didn't do so hot on them (2010), but still managed to get into a target. Should I retake them before I apply for a job? I'm a rising sophomore btw.
Thanks.
so long as your math score is above 700 you probably do not want to because the other sections are not really given that much weight in finance. In any situation it would not really be in your best interest to spend the time to retake them.
just keep your sats off your resume.
How important are SAT scores? (Originally Posted: 12/12/2011)
I noticed a lot of banks ask for SAT scores. However, my SATs are low compared to most ivy kids (it is a 1250, 1930 w/ writing). How much will this impact my chances?
Unless you are going to retake it, who cares at this point? It's out of your control so put it on where required and hope for the best
I worried about this myself when applying. I didn't take the SAT but took the ACT and scored very low despite the fact that I was able to get into a respected and solid semi-target university. My ACT was below 28 and very unimpressive, however I was able to get a FT IB offer from a MM in the end and found that many interviewers didn't really care that much, just were curious.
The way I spun it was asking why a test that I took four years ago had any bearing or relativity to my intelligence now. I said that I am a far more developed person intellectually and personally since my senior year of high school and I didn't think my score was an accurate display of my abilities. Many interviewers didn't have a good answer for me and most agreed.
Hope that helps
I have a 1530/1600 and never received any interviews so it can't be that important. Just somehow show that you can do simple math.
Is it worth taking the SAT over in college? (Originally Posted: 04/28/2013)
I'll be a freshman this fall at a semi/non-target. My SAT scores are alright. I have a 1270/1600, 1980/2400. Is it worth taking these over in my freshman or sophomore year if i want a job in IBD later on? Does being schooled in a foreign (third world) country or being a minority mean anything to recruiters etc.?
Regarding your first question, I've noticed only a few banks ask for SAT score when you apply for internships. Those are normally big banks. If you want to go to a boutique bank, I doubt if they would ask for SAT. GPA would be much more important in either case. However, it never hurts to make yourself look more competitive if you have the time and resources.
No. I've never heard of someone retaking the SAT. Your scores are fine. Unless you want to work for a top tier HF or prop firm I doubt anyone is going to ask for you SAT scores. Just move on with life.
I think you have a great score. There is really no point in retaking it because I doubt that many people will ask.
Do you need to still be a student to retake the test?
there is absolutely no reason you should consider retaking it.
Thanks everyone and no EPS I don't think so. I know people who have done it who weren't students. & by 'big banks do you mean bulge bracket banks baldmonkey? Will the SAT be relevant after I graduate when applying to full time jobs?
You don't need to be a student to retake it (SAT tutors take it all the time).
Don't retake it. The time you spend on prepping for and taking the SAT can be spent in a far more productive manner, for example, networking or establishing a finance or business club at your school.
Yup that's what I meant!
Importance of SAT (Originally Posted: 01/07/2008)
Does anyone have insight as to how important this is to firms? It seems like a lot of them are looking at it but just how much does it matter? Is is measured on par w/ GPA? What kind of scores are firms looking for? Would they care about relavent subject tests as well (Math IIC)?
Also, is anyone looking at the writing section of the new SAT (out of 2400) or are they still just looking at the Math and Reading sections? I figure by now the juniors going for SA positions are the first class to have taken the expanded SAT.
Any thoughts?
Nah the juniors going for SA positions now have not taken the expanded SAT, we took the regular math & verbal one. We were the cutoff year.
As for how much it matters, I don't think it's measured on par as GDP but higher is always better. I know all firms ask for it and some firms like D.E. Shaw ask even when you are an experienced applicant.
Not sure how much firms care about SAT II's (don't really understand why), but most people on this firm do not advocate you putting your SAT II on your resume unless you're applying for consulting. That being said, some firms still ask you for your SAT II's on the online application form.
Yea we took the normal shit
I think Lehman only takes SAs with 1400 or higher....not sure though
I don't understand why they don't look at SAT 2. I think SAT 2 math (level2) is far more related to the banking field than SAT 1 math and verbal
I took the ACT and got a 30. (Which I believe translates to just over a 1350) and I got a first and final round interview with Lehman. Can't say that ACT/SAT scores count for that much.
Yeah I definitely agree that the SAT 2 Math II is much more difficult than the regular SAT Math, although none of the questions on any of the SAT tests ever get as hard as some of the brainteasers i've read here.
At any rate, it sounds like the SAT is just another yardstick, not really important as long as you don't suck, which can be good or bad (depending on how you did).
The reality is that it matters for some banks and some interviewers, but for others it does not. I know that Lehman put the most emphasis at of all of my interviews, as I did poorly and when it came up during 1st rounds, I was told that it may be an issue. Citi, CS, and JP never mentioned it
well first of all the sat is meant to be a predictor of performance in college. that said, it'd be rather secondary to even consider it as undergraduate gpa would be the most recent and relevant measurement of what the sat sets out to quantify.
citi & GS asked mine
to add, the SATs are very standardized whereas GPAs at individual schools are not. Think grade inflation/deflation can be misleading. Although it's not a perfect measaure, the SATs still measure everyone with the same yardstick.
I think colleges should disclose class rank. High schools do it and it would be alot easier to see where someone with a 3.5 stands. At some schools, a 3.5 may be very ordinary but at others a 3.5 would be great e.g. Chicago.
Unless you've done poorly (e.g. below what it would take to get into a target), I don't think it will come up during an interview. And even if it does, you can always find a way of explaining it away... "I wasn't as focused then but I've learned and have performed very well in college so far," basically just emphasize you're a hard worker and that should fix any SAT problems because banking is 99% hard work and 1% raw intelligence.
GPA definitely matters a lot more than SAT. Yes, there is grade inflation, it's not standardized, etc. etc. but it shows how well you performed over several years in an academic setting, which is a much better indicator of your work ethic than the SAT.
I've never heard of someone getting dinged because of an SAT score that was too low, but anything is possible I suppose. I wouldn't stress too much on this one.
Retaking the SAT - Graduating in May (Originally Posted: 04/07/2009)
What does everyone think about retaking the SAT? I'm graduating in May, have a FT IB job at MM, but I want to lateral after a year to a BB or elite boutique. There's a list of about six or seven banks I'd go to, and I have some decent contacts at all of them (alums from my sort of non-target). I have a really high GMAT (760), will graduate with a decent GPA, and would lateral back a year (essentially start as a 1st year analyst at my new bank). I think a really good SAT score coupled with my really good GMAT, connections, work experience (I'd have a full-year as an analyst), and EC's (D1 varsity athlete, volunteer) would give me a great chance to get into one of these places.
Another reason is for PE. I think that after my two-year stint, I'll want to get into PE. And I'd like to work at a megafund or a top player in the MM. I realize that not only do I need to come from a top bank, but I also need to have top scores, and the SAT is a score that is often looked at. My SAT isn't terrible, but it is far from reflective of my current abilities. I wouldn't want to get the shaft simply because of my SAT.
Should I retake it? Is it dishonest to do so? I would assume I'd score just about perfect at this point (I certainly hope so), and it would look great on my resume, but would employers take this as a load of BS? Or would it not even matter? Thanks for your opinions.
don't waste your time. do well at your job and make the necessary connections. having heads of desks/groups fight for you is 100000X more important than your SAT score. that shit is thrown out the window if you can put up numbers @ work and have senior ppl vouch for you.
i woudlnt bother, and you already have your GMAT. i cant see the return being worth the hassle. listen to pnL
This can't be real, and if it is....die
This must be a joke.
See we're kind of like the government, so just respect my conglomerate!
It is real. I realize it's a BIT ridiculous, but I'm trying to rid my resume of the stigma that is "non target." It's a good school, but it doesn't get much lovin' from the big banks. I would like to end up at a big bank (and, subsequently, a big PE fund), and I know I need to do whatever I can to stand out. Someone suggested this as a possible way to do so, and that is why I brought it here.
b4f, PnL, thanks for the advice. I guess it is sort of a stupid idea, though it did sound great at first. It's not like it would really cost me anything - $45 to take it, a few hours on a Saturday morning, and I wouldn't need to prepare at all.
nygiants, I'll see what I can do. Thanks for the words of encouragement.
Hahaha, comment rescinded, good luck
Its not worth it. Your GMAT is awesome anyway
worst idea ever
I'll preface by saying I don't disagree. It seemed great at first, but after thinking about it and reading the responses, it seems that it certainly is a terrible idea.
What's sort of funny about this is that the guy who suggested this is about to become a 3rd year analyst in Goldman's IBD. I guess that doesn't mean he's going to be full of good ideas, but you wouldn't think he'd be giving me the worst idea ever.
I don't think your SAT scores have anything to do with the "stigma of a non-target." I went to a non-target, albeit a good one, and my SAT was solid. The point is, your GMAT dispels any fears that you don't have the quant or verbal chops. And a few hours not spent sleeping on a saturday morning is a big deal.
Ah, glad to hear that. Most people say the GMAT won't cover for the fact that I have "poor" SATs (I must digress; my SATs were probably top 3 or 4 in my high school class and are actually pretty solid. But when it comes to banking/PE, they are considered below average. Wonderful...) because firms believe SAT is a true indicator of intelligence, but GMATs can be studied for. But it's good to hear that is not true. Looks like I won't be the oldest guy in the room at SAT test day.
And nygiants, no worries. I've made my fair share of similar comments.
dude - you have a 760, which obviously means standardized testing is a fucking joke to you.
take it again, (only wastes 4 hours), and get a diesel score.
To be fair, I busted balls to get a 760. The first time I took it I got a 640 - that was with zero preparation. I looked at the test format and did a quick math review, but nothing else.
I bought the official guides and the Manhattan GMAT SC, studied for about six weeks (probably an hour or two a day), and took the test and nailed it. So it's not as sweet as prepping for a week and scoring a 760, but it's a 760.
I'm thinking about trying out for a local pee wee football team. I was pretty good back in the day, but now that I'm 6'3", 225, I think I could dominate. I did play college football, but I believe employers will be really impressed by a midget league MYP trophy. Plus, I could be team captain, and show people that I know how to lead the next generation of Americans.
How the hell did you play college football if the colleges recruiting you only had your Pee Wee football performance to base your skills off of? You must have been one fine Pee Wee football player.
Really though, thanks for your wonderful analogy. I'm thinking you're going to want to change local pee wee football team to local professional football team - makes it more relevant. And they'll have to base their decision off of film/skills from your Pee Wee days. Something tells me you don't have that great of a shot.
Sorry man, I couldn't resist.
Look, a 760 is awesome. If you are doing this to put the score on a PE resume, don't worry. Most people there will have taken the GMAT, and will really respect your score. The last thing you have to worry about is your standardized test performance.
haha, no worries. I understand the ball-busting - in retrospect, it was a pretty stupid question. And you did come up with a pretty good analogy, or at least it was kinda funny.
Do people retake their SATs in college? (Originally Posted: 06/30/2013)
Since many companies want to see standardized test scores on resumes, is it common for people who didn't perform well in high school to take them again when they start applying for jobs?
eww, no. If anything, take the gmat/gre if you think there is any chance of you going to graduate school within the next 5 years
If you're attempting to transfer and are insecure about your SATs then yes. Otherwise, no.
hellll no
I've never met anyone who has.
I've never met anyone who has even had this thought.
Meet me. I am thinking about it :D
Retake SAT for IB SA/FT positions? (Originally Posted: 11/13/2011)
I currently attend a non-target, but was accepted to an Ivy as a transfer student. I have one finance-related (PWM) internship so far, but don't know how competitive that is for an SA position. Currently, I have a 3.9 GPA, and have taken many quant classes (all math-heavy), however my SAT was on the low side in HS (1210-1240/1600) and I don't know if it would be wise to retake them? Will this hinder me for SA/FT positions and stick with me, even though I have proved myself through other courses? Is this consider a bad SAT? Should I start studying for the GMAT (I don't plan on going MBA currently) just for SA/FT IB jobs? Thanks
No.
Is that because my score is fine, or retaking it is looked down upon, or because people don't care?
No - almost nobody cares about your SAT's when you start working. If they ever ask you about it, just be honest and confident about it, and that you got where you are today through hard work. After all, math in finance for the most part is straight up multiplying and dividing, and if you are getting really fancy you might see an exponent here or there. A 700+ in math is not a prereq for this industry.
Every hedge fund internship I apply for asks for SAT scores. If you don't ever want to leave banking then idk what you should do
Retake it. There's no downside and a lot of people that I've met in banking care significantly about your scores (it's stupid but they do). If you ever want to jump to the buyside it will matter too, and. - 1200 can definitely put you out of thr running for alot of great PE and HF opps down thr road.
Alright, so I'm assuming if I re-take it, they won't look at dates and will ding me because they noticed I re-took the SAT while in college?
At what point are scores "sufficient" for HF/PE? 1300? 1400?
I really doubt sat scores limit your exit ops. If a firm values a historical score from 7 years ago over soft skills and more relevant experience after college then Id rather go start my own shop or go somewhere else
take it now and see if your score is dramatically different (practice test). if it is, put in minimal effort to bring it to a great score, and take it again. otherwise, don't waste your time taking a prep class or whatever. it's just easy cost-benefit...
Anyone who you for your SAT scores will most likely ding you for going to a non-target. I wouldn't bother.
*dings
i thought about doing the same thing last year.
Gnome - if taking the SAT again will make you sleep better at night, then just go for it. But take a quick look at finance positions being advertised (whether through on campus channels or external recruiting sites), and you'll notice that they typically have a GPA threshold, but rarely (personally, I've never seen it, and I've applied to ER, IB, PE, and VC jobs) ask for SATs. I could see the question maybe popping up if you are an English major and the interviewer wants a benchmark to gauge your quantitative skills. But if you are taking quant heavy classes in college and performing well in them, then I don't see why the SAT would provide additional 'color' to your application in the professional world. Rather than study for the SAT, use that time to network with a few people in the industry to better position yourself for interviews. That's being wayy more productive.
Worth it to retake SAT's? (Originally Posted: 11/03/2008)
Hi,
I graduated college in May and unfortunately developed my passion for trading quite late. I am finding that I am getting shut out of some prop firms because of my poor SAT scores. When I took them in 2002, I did not study at all and inevitably I did poorly as a result.
I believe one could take them after college if they wish. If so, would you recommend it? Once I get a job, I am sure it becomes a null issue, but I am thinking it may help me get in the door.
Thanks for the advice
how poor were they/ can you give us a range if you don't wish to disclose exact scores?
what are you doing now/ do you have any options as of now?
best of luck, Paradoxical
The shops you have interviewed with are explicitly denying you because of your SAT scores? Not because of work experience, you would be a lateral hire, alma mater, grades, or even that this is a shitty economy but because of your SAT score?
You could take the GMAT instead, just to show that you can test well on standardized tests
Thanks, guys
I am sure and know it was a combo of things, Bearing. But I still believe my SAT's really did me in. I won't lie- Math portion was around 500/800. English wasn't much better. Like I said, I did not even open the prep book. And some of these firms specifically want those numbers when applying. At that point in my life I did not feel college was in my future. Since then, I have gone on to a CC and my best acceptance was into NYU, but I ended up finishing my BA at a lesser NYC area college. That was a mistake as well, since bigger name is probably always better. GPA was mediocre where I ended up going (3.2 overall, 3.4 finance).
I have an entrepreneurial background, but the work itself is low level. I don't want to give away too much since you never know who reads this. Right now, I am specifically looking at prop firms, which in all honestly is the one area I feel myself fitting and looking forward to work. I've applied to around 5, which is not a huge number, but I am mainly trying to look at the more reputable ones.
The GMAT is an interesting idea...Any other thoughts?
i wouldn't bother. would take too much effort to improve your score that drastically for it to even remotely matter. don't forget that they've changed the format and you'd have to relearn the test. gmat is a much better option
You have an unimpressive GPA from a non target and no finance related work experience. You can't change your resume, but you can probably improve the way it looks. Expand on your strong points and minimize your weak grades. Rearrange your resume.
And apply to MORE FIRMS! 5 is almost nothing, so don't start stressing out just yet.
Hey Getgo,
I did get it reviewed and improved by "Dosk" on here. He did a great job, but there is only so much one can do. I'd say we are semi-target, not that it matters.
The frustrating aspect is that I feel I have most of the qualities and characteristics of a good trader and I have noted them specifically in my cover letters w/ examples. But one thing I can't back up is "quantitative" since I did not take many math courses and bombed my SAT's. I did have the SAT question asked in an interview and I was just trying to think how to supplement my answer w/ some proof or backing that I am not a total idiot with numbers. But at that time I could think of nothing. Any advice for this? I have ran my business and kept all #'s yearly in excel, projections, etc. Took financial modeling where you have to be comfortable dealing w/ statements and their numbers. But these don't seem good enough, IMO.
My next step is looking into alumni since I know a few of them are working at some of these shops.
I still don't see the relevance of a HS test in determining job placement. The point is you graduated college got a BS/BA and are now entering the workforce. If anything, focus should be placed on college performance and GMAT, if anything.
This is just another stupid and infantile tactic utilized by investment bank recruiting. Talent development? Managerial potential? I think not.
These banks dont care about your personality/potential/ability to grow in the organization. Because if they did, such a stupid question and number would not matter.
I have the same problem - my SATs were good enough to get me into Penn/Wharton, but a lot of hedge funds I look at require 1500+ to even be considered (I'm still on the 1600 pt system)
I've thought about retaking them. My issue is that if the person put 2 and 2 together, they'd realize that given my age, my score should be on the 1600 pt scale instead of the 2400. Furthermore, I just think it'd be sort of dishonest, because college does teach you to think more conceptually (ie - I think I'd score a lot higher now). It wouldn't necessarily be lying, but it wouldn't be telling the whole truth.
My little bro is applying to college and taking it soon - maybe I'll take it with him, just for amusement.
Yanks I see that you don't understand the relevance of a HS test score (to be honest nor do I)... but the issue is that a lot of firms do use it as a barometer/cutoff much like GPA. I had very high SATs and was asked about it a lot, in fact some firms require it so I ended up just putting it on my resume outright. I didn't realize how much they cared about it until I started the recruiting process.
If you do take it again, I'd recommend just still using M+V, ignore the writing, to be honest no one cares about it and chances are they aren't going to go to the bother of looking up your score... and its not like you're making it up, its pretty common to ignore the writing score.
I would agree with the above posters that a smarter bet would probably be the GMAT, since it would be more relevant and also you would have it done if you ever considered grad school.
SUCK ASS TEST. NUFF SAID.
Firms generally view it as an indicator of your general aptitude and intelligence, while your college GPA indicates how hard you worked, not necessarily how smart you are. I'm not supporting this method, but know that that's what they're doing.
Thanks again for the advice.
I understand why they use it, albeit it sucks that it really is not indicative of how you currently stack up, IMO. A lot of people have different study habits from mid-HS compared to late college. It may be a test that indicates general aptitude, but you can certainly study for it (as is proven by the many books, pre courses, etc).
Anyways, I have to go over trade4's list and uncover some other NYC firms.
In fact a lot firms like Macquarie are doing their own sort of SAT testing with the psychometric test and all. I know a lot of firms recruiting for Asia require you to take a numerical and verbal reasoning test which is so similar to the GMAT. I would suggest you take the GMAT/GRE and try and score well in that.
Adult? Retake SAT? (Originally Posted: 05/31/2010)
Is it weird to take the SAT as an adult in his/her late twenties? I've seen a lot of recruiters ask for the SAT score nowadays.
Yes, very weird. Take the GMAT if you want to take a standardized test.
Any recruiter that would ask a college graduate for their SAT scores is a moron.
i agree....absolutely crush the gmats and they will not observe your sat's
Retake SAT for HF/PE/IB jobs? (Originally Posted: 11/14/2011)
I posted this in the IB forum also:
I currently attend a non-target, but was accepted to an Ivy as a transfer student. I have one finance-related (PWM) internship so far, but don't know how competitive that is for an SA position. Currently, I have a 3.9 GPA, and have taken many quant classes (all math-heavy), however my SAT was on the low side in HS (1210-1240/1600) and I don't know if it would be wise to retake them? Will this hinder me for SA/Intern/FT positions and stick with me, even though I have proved myself through other courses? Is this consider a bad SAT? Should I start studying for the GMAT (I don't plan on going MBA currently) just for SA/FT IB/HF/PE jobs? Thanks
im interested as well
Interesting Idea - would like to hear some opinions on this as well.
Study for and kill the GMAT instead.
I asked a similar question just switch SAT with ACT... from what I remember it shouldn't hurt you too much, especially if you do good in school afterwards (sounds like you're doing damn good) and, if anything, you should just take the GMAT instead of retaking the SAT and put the GMAT on your resume. It also seems like most firms just have a minimum SAT score for a cutoff, so it shouldn't adversely affect you too much, if at all.
I think a 3.9 from an Ivy with quantitative classes should overshadow a sub-par SAT, that's just me though.
Some people are probably going to tell you to use the search function... and it's definitely useful with this type of question because there are quite a bit of threads that are pretty much the same thing.
Retaking the SAT - Graduated from a top engineering school (Originally Posted: 04/28/2010)
I need to retake the SAT...please don't ask why.
I am really good at Math (750+) but terrible at Verbal (~500) and Writing (~600). I live in NYC now and really want to get 700+ for Verbal and Writing. What should I do? Self-study? I am sure there are lots of SAT tutors around town, worth talking to them?
Stats: Graduated from a top engineering school, 3.8GPA, foreigner (hence the terrible English), working at a boutique now.
Thanks much!
if you graduated from a top engineering school with a 3.8... your knowledge of english and it's grammar can not be THAT bad. and you really have to take it over again?
... you could take an SAT course. I hear those help a bit, but that may be tough with a full workload.
why would you retake it after you graduate from college?
are you even allowed to take the SATs after high school?
The man said don't ask why. My guess is some hot chic said that she would bang him if he could get +2150. That's about all I can come up with for why you would take the fuckin SAT after college. Sir, if I were you, I would accept your 1850 score and bang a whore.
Thanks for the helpful and funny replies.
I am not looking to take a Princeton Review/Kaplan course cause they were not that helpful to me. I am looking to hire some 2400 genius (I don't care if he is younger than me) that can tell me his/her tricks in taking the test. I am not saying there is some magical formula in taking the test but I am sure there is some secret sauce.
My English has improved a lot during college and now I want to kill the SAT in one shot. I am willing to study my ass off for this.
So, the question is, do these kind of private tutors helpful? Anyone?
Any other advice is much appreciated as well.
Intellectual masturbation much?
what the? you have a bet on this or something?
.
i also did my ugrad in US and was an intnl. My verbal was higher than yours, but it comes down to memorizing vocabulary. You can push Verbal up like 100 pts by learning 500 new words. Since you have been in the U.S., your vocab is probably good anyways. I dont think there is any magical formula. You just have to spend 1 hr every night to learn 20 new words or smtg. When I was at hs, I could do it easily. I dont think I would be able to do it now though..
I can think of several reasons you could be wanting to retake the SAT for in which taking (and killing) the GMAT would be a better option. If I'm completely off and it's SATs or nothing, ignore my comment.
Thanks for all the comments.
Feel free to PM me if you are a private tutor.
Ea consequatur magni qui. Provident qui sit non laboriosam magni in provident. Est earum non quis eligendi maxime. Dolorem consectetur aliquid adipisci iusto eos autem quos. Dignissimos et temporibus quia aperiam veniam vel adipisci. Recusandae maiores voluptatum qui dignissimos.
Totam accusamus qui sit sint minima aut. Dolores repellendus voluptas qui autem. Tempore exercitationem rerum dolores voluptas.
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...
Hic unde et maxime rerum. Ea qui fuga adipisci sint facilis nihil animi. Dolorem dolor libero ea dolorem non.
Asperiores quidem culpa consequatur. Asperiores sequi placeat magni delectus deserunt voluptatem ea. Amet aspernatur nihil exercitationem error hic.
Ex nulla eaque magnam illum voluptatibus. Rerum nihil eum provident repellat dicta repellendus illum. Id cum veniam in et quaerat quas amet autem.
Quia qui est in eligendi laborum quis. Ratione quasi vel vel sint accusantium suscipit sequi. Voluptate doloremque maiores aut accusantium quis.
Culpa quidem omnis ut. Necessitatibus et cumque distinctio quaerat debitis voluptatibus officiis. Architecto eligendi sit fugit quibusdam voluptatem dolor qui. Et voluptate dolorem recusandae dolor. Dicta veritatis aut autem sint reiciendis labore et. Alias in nobis labore autem quia rerum velit. Sunt qui nam neque nemo quo est voluptatem.
Culpa qui ut harum in ipsam. Non repudiandae porro ut qui. Est rerum aut et.
Quasi at quis iste sit nesciunt et sed labore. Nulla voluptatem in natus maiores nam eos sequi velit. Placeat excepturi impedit voluptas eos soluta ut architecto. Cumque possimus hic sit perferendis aspernatur.
Est ut temporibus ipsa sed molestiae odio maxime. Eum vitae eligendi fuga et. Minima quia accusantium ut autem nostrum dignissimos est blanditiis. Enim qui commodi quia ipsam.
Exercitationem ab reprehenderit suscipit aut consequuntur voluptatem nisi. Alias corporis eligendi harum enim et iure. Iure excepturi fugiat suscipit architecto laudantium autem id. Hic quibusdam voluptas iure beatae omnis voluptas. Et facilis iste expedita dolores. Necessitatibus aut molestiae qui eveniet et dolor.
Amet delectus aut tenetur. Omnis culpa magnam fugit officia qui blanditiis. Dignissimos sit ratione quasi quia. Perferendis at mollitia pariatur omnis. Doloremque explicabo tempora dolorum molestiae quibusdam beatae. Facilis aut sunt repellat voluptatibus eaque eum placeat.
Illo est repudiandae odit error. Quasi perferendis iure consectetur velit rem est. Incidunt eius facilis aut quod. Cum quidem assumenda labore recusandae. Autem aliquid qui asperiores dignissimos occaecati ut omnis. Voluptas accusamus error minima facere.
Facere quaerat blanditiis id omnis. Inventore exercitationem non facere. Nisi quo consequuntur magnam doloribus voluptatum repellendus aliquam. Ut fugit ipsam quo dolore quidem ut. Necessitatibus ad labore optio fugiat est nisi.
Tempora dolor nam nisi aut beatae in nobis. At a quam ratione quidem amet. Et excepturi voluptate quia iure ipsum. Iure tempore dolore nam molestias. Repellendus quidem repellat quod et.
Nisi optio qui voluptates. Incidunt qui sequi expedita quam in magni voluptate exercitationem. Reiciendis hic enim minus nobis.
Fugiat dignissimos soluta voluptatem distinctio aliquam. Reiciendis incidunt voluptates optio quo laborum. Vero veritatis deserunt quia quia.
Illo veniam dolor totam voluptatem culpa. Asperiores porro quos id. Iste laborum aut ut.
Quis ipsam accusantium ut. Voluptas voluptas velit et ut. Molestias quia consectetur possimus voluptas nobis qui.
Debitis quia quia placeat praesentium sapiente rerum modi. Omnis rem qui aut vitae voluptatibus commodi laborum. Esse est beatae molestias omnis omnis voluptas incidunt debitis. Nulla dolor qui possimus corporis.
Mollitia quas ut dolor aliquam omnis aut. Molestiae dolor voluptatem aspernatur quisquam similique ut adipisci modi. Delectus culpa nam non nihil aut dolor voluptate aut. Sed consequatur magni et cupiditate. Amet et eveniet non enim. Quae nobis est eum minima quidem qui.
Enim quidem quaerat neque quo eum. Quas non qui sed ipsa. Quasi repudiandae corrupti ut omnis iure.
Blanditiis voluptates assumenda sed iusto totam autem error. Illum saepe deleniti reiciendis tempora et quasi qui iste. Deserunt omnis accusantium officiis omnis dolores. Dolor dolores minus quo corporis dolor eum aut.