GMAT Quant score/Engineering degree

Vulpes's picture
Rank: Chimp | 13

Hi all,

Been reading this site for a while now, but first post, so here goes;

I'm currently in my final year at Imperial College doing an Engineering degree (MEng), and in the process of applying for Masters in Finance (or similar) at a variety of the top business schools/universities - LSE, Imperial, Cass, Princeton, Bocconi, ESSEC, HEC, etc.

I've already taken the GMAT after studying for 3 weeks and got 710 overall (Q47, V40). That represents a 73rd quant percentile, 90th verbal and 92nd overall. My engineering degree is obviously highly quantitative and I've done a large number of maths, statistics, programming and almost all of my subjects contain a strong mathematical component, however I was wondering if my quant score would be strongly looked down upon despite my quantitative degree? I'm aware that in the states the GMAT is quite a highly weighted part of one's application, but I have the impression that its slightly less so in Europe - am I right or simply delusional?

Would appreciate any advice/experience from people in the know, or those who've been in similar situations!

Thanks

Comments (23)

Oct 8, 2012

I would take it again if I were in your position. You say that you have a highly quantitative degree (obviously), so a 51Q should be quite well within your grasp. That would take you to 730-740 and place you into a somewhat competitive bucket. (What's screwing you in the quant? Is it the pressure of time?)
A 710 GMAT is really nothing spectacular. It won't do much for you, and may even hurt you.

Oct 9, 2012

Cheers for the replies guys.

<span class=keyword_link><a href=//www.wallstreetoasis.com/company/goldman-sachs rel=nofollow>GS</a></span>:

(What's screwing you in the quant? Is it the pressure of time?)

Not really sure actually, no I don't think its the time pressure as I almost always finish everything on time, and was not that pushed for time on here. I seemed to get loads of DS questions which are not my favourite, but that might have just been an impression I got.

droking7:

What's your GPA

I've currently got a high first class honours (1:1), with around 75%, and have been on the Dean's List for the past two years - not quite sure how accurately you can convert that to a traditional american GPA.

I think I'll probably re-take it, just a bit annoying since I'll be starting all my classes soon, etc. Any specific techniques I could employ to get the Q47 to Q50/51?

Oct 9, 2012
vulpes:

I think I'll probably re-take it, just a bit annoying since I'll be starting all my classes soon, etc. Any specific techniques I could employ to get the Q47 to Q50/51?

Honestly? I would focus a bit more on the verbal side, especially if English is your first language. Bringing your verbal up just a bit will put improve your overall score significantly. A Q47 really isn't that much different than a Q49 unless you nerd out and look at percentiles. I doubt an adcom will care about the difference between a 47 and a 49, but they sure as shit will care about the difference between a 700 and a 750.

Hell, you'll probably go up a bit (or stay about the same) on the math side just by taking the test a second time -- most people improve their scores the second time around.

Oct 8, 2012

You might be a rare case of a 710+ GMAT actually hurting you, and not helping you (although I'm not positive what top MsFs look for in the GMAT score). What's your GPA? Given your quant-heavy background, a Q47 may indicate that you're just a hardworker and raise red flags about your intelligence on the application. Definitely take it again.

Oct 9, 2012

Yeah Brady, Give 'em hell!

Free Consultation

Vantage Point MBA's clients are accepted to the top MBA programs at a 3x higher rate than the average acceptance rates. Request a consultation with their team to learn how they can help you gain admission to your dream schools. Learn more.

Oct 10, 2012

This might help some of you when talking about scoring - Its last year's results ( I think, save for the IR #s), but still fairly accurate.

http://gmatclub.com/forum/gmat-scores-83890.html

Oct 10, 2012
hamm0:

This might help some of you when talking about scoring - Its last year's results ( I think, save for the IR #s), but still fairly accurate.

http://gmatclub.com/forum/gmat-scores-83890.html

I took mine at the end of August 2012. 51Q 48V and 780. So, I think this grid is quite outdated.

(I've seen 50Q 48V 780 and 51Q 47V 780) I think the buckets get a lot larger and tougher to break out of as you move towards the Apex.

That chart is for Manhattan GMAT's online CATs, I think. Not the real thing. I took one sample from MGMAT and had 50Q 45V 770. That is in line with the aforementioned grid.

Oct 10, 2012

Looks like it was updated in September, but you're right - we have no way of knowing where the information is from. I think its a good rule of thumb, as long as you stay away from the extreme 800 or 500 scores. Congrats on your awesome score, btw.

Oct 10, 2012
hamm0:

Looks like it was updated in September, but you're right - we have no way of knowing where the information is from. I think its a good rule of thumb, as long as you stay away from the extreme 800 or 500 scores. Congrats on your awesome score, btw.

Thx. The distribution also seems wrong. You'd expect the raw score buckets (for a particular total score) to get larger and larger as you approach the apex. But let's look at what happens when we hold 51Q constant. 41 and 42 make it 750, 43 makes it 760, 44 makes it 770, 45 and 46 make it 780, 47 makes it 790, and 48-51 make it 800. This seems intuitively wrong.

Oct 10, 2012
hamm0:

Looks like it was updated in September, but you're right - we have no way of knowing where the information is from. I think its a good rule of thumb, as long as you stay away from the extreme 800 or 500 scores. Congrats on your awesome score, btw.

Some additional information: this scoring chart was correct for my two 2012 scores (710 and 740).

I'm not looking forward to taking the GMAT again. Ugh.

Oct 10, 2012
holla_back:
hamm0:

Looks like it was updated in September, but you're right - we have no way of knowing where the information is from. I think its a good rule of thumb, as long as you stay away from the extreme 800 or 500 scores. Congrats on your awesome score, btw.

As some additional information, this scoring chart was correct for my two 2012 scores (710 and 740).

I'm not looking forward to taking the GMAT again. Ugh.

Dude. I'd say it's worth it if you can break 760. But it looks like hamm is right for the grid being off for the extreme scores. FYI, I think Wharton requires that you report all scores.

Oct 30, 2012
Comment