I am wondering if a high GMAT score on one's resume would offset a middle-of-the-road GPA and could replace an SAT score. I will be graduating in May and have a FT MM IB gig lined up. I do have an interest in either lateraling to a more prestigious firm or heading to a PE firm. Would a 750+ GMAT score help outweigh a decent GPA (3.42 cumulative, 3.68 accounting) at a tier I liberal arts college (not much of a target, though we do occasionally get OCR from alums - not this year though!)?
I obviously understand it won't hurt - what I'm wondering is, if an analyst/associate/HR/someone is going through a stack of resumes, will that GMAT score make me stand out? Thanks!
I'd probably say no. It won't hurt, but don't expect too much of a boost from it. GPA is typically a good indicator of how hard you work and how consistent your performance.
I haven't taken the GMAT (nor have most of the analysts/HR that typically review resumes), so that could be why it may mean less to me than it does to an associate who has taken it
why would an analyst review the resume of someone who successfully completed an analyst program at a different bank and wants to lateral into another position? Wouldn't that task go to at least an associate?
Thanks, that makes sense. I was hoping it could act as a replacement for an "average" SAT score (average by way of the Street). I guess if someone hasn't taken the exam, it would be tough to understand how difficult the GMAT is when compared to other standardized tests.
Let me clarify - this would be after one year of FT and I would want to lateral as an analyst into the group. I would likely have to lose a year and would be going in as a first year analyst.
Actually, I realize that in this case it's unlikely that I would go through the typical recruiting process. I'd probably have to go through a contact and he would take care of it. I just was wondering if a high score would help me stand out.
Obviously can't help - what I'd do is put it before and on the same line as SAT score so it will clearly show progress
What is considered a decent SAT score on the street? Anything above 1400 (out of 1600)?
are SATs relevant, especially for looking at jobs subsequent to being an analyst? It's something you took when you were still in high-school.
in my opinion SAT's have no value whatsoever. Come on you took the test when you were 16/17 how mature can you be?? The test is a joke and if you can't crack 1300 you need to hit the books again.
I think I have a very good resume, target school, ib fo internships, good extracurriculars, but my GPA is terrible (3.0). I am studying for the GMAT right now because I know that when I do well (had a 650 test score with no practice) it at least proves that I am smart enough to do the work.
Gonna agree with dipset for once. I took them hungover and got an 800V/760M/750W
They may be a good proxy for intelligence, but if you seriously struggled with them you should reexamine your goals
I only got a 1320 when I took them in high school. 760M, 560V, which is absolutely horrendous. My HS had an absolutely terrible English department, which probably had a bit to do with the awful score. On the GMAT, I scored in the 95th percentile in verbal, which is a huge improvement from SATs.
The most difficult part of the SAT Verbal in my opinion was the analogies, which isn't included in the GMAT. I think the Verbal section of the GMAT is more comparable to the LSAT in terms of format, although the LSAT is MUCH more difficult.
Test scores are important, the higher the better. People do pay attention to them. FYI, when you try to jump to the buyside, they will ask for your test scores.
ideating, will PE firms ask for only SAT scores, only GMAT scores, or both? I have heard they ask for test scores, but I would imagine they would take the GMAT over the SAT since it is a far more recent score.
They will ask for both - you won't be able to hide your shitty SAT score. Good GMAT may compensate some but for some tops firms, the SAT will put you out of the running.
So a 1320 SAT will put me out of the running despite having a 770 GMAT score, i.e. likely better than nearly all of their post-MBA associates? I can see it putting me out of the running if I'm posting a 1320 with a 700 or 710, but I'd say it's pretty clear that the SAT I took five years ago is not as indicative of my intelligence as the GMAT is.
There's no cap on the age at which you can take an SAT to my knowledge. Sign up for one, bust out a 2400, and nobody will mention it again. You'll be surrounded by high schoolers and it'll be awkward, but it will be a legit score, so that's what I'd do if you're really worried.
Personally, a 770 GMAT score doesn't impress me when paired with a low SAT - it says the GMAT is an indicator of how hard you studied, rather than innate intelligence.
i would take a kid that studied hard to recieve a 770 over a kids "innate" ability to score a perfect score on SAT's.......Honestly if a company puts that much emphasis on SAT scores i probably would not want to work for them. Thats ridiculous to put so much weight on a test that you took when you were 16/17
Not the point... the issue is, when you're going for top PE slots everyone is hard working. Hard working + innate intelligence > hard working, and SAT score is the easiest way to tell if someone is innately intelligent. Jerry Rice may have been the hardest working receiver ever, and it showed in his performance, but it is a lot easier to measure 40 time than work ethic, so that's how teams draft
That's fair - I guess you're right. I should go take the test again. The funny thing is, I'd probably not get a 2400 - those analogies ALWAYS killed me.
Also, if you do retake the test just ignore the writing section - people might question why someone your age took it out of 2400 rather than out of 1600.
drexelalum, are you actually employed at a Bank/trading shop/fund? Not trying to call you out, but if you aren't (which I suspect is the case) you should probably stop telling other prospectives that their scores aren't good enough and they should do this and that to improve their shot at a great opportunity...you're still in school...
Pretty sure that's not what I did, nor was I out of line... I told him what my opinion was, and a suggestion for how I thought he could put his mind at rest. I'm still in school, as is most of this board, and I suspect very little would get said or done if we simply sat quietly in the corner. Considering SATs cost about $60 I'd say my advice was valid and has a fairly sizable potential upside.
Wow, this is ridiculous. I went to the College Board site and you are correct - I can take it again. I absolutely should retake it - I'm doing practice problems and haven't gotten one wrong yet!
Say I scored a 1600. Obviously, the firm probably wouldn't look into it until I was accepted for a position. If the firm saw I took the test when I was a senior in college, would they knock me for that? It wouldn't be a misrepresentation, as I wouldn't be lying about the score, but it is a bit deceitful...
I really don't see how a test you took when you were 16/17 is going to affect you getting a job at 24+ yrs old (especially in PE). Should you include your high school GPA too? GMAT is much more relevant.
Drexel,
your rational seems justified but your analogy is downright horrendous. I can name several examples, one being Tom Brady, a 6th round draft pick, bench warmer, and just did not have stellar stats go on to win 3 superbowls. Well compare him to a Vernon Davis a physical freak who just has not lived up to potential and has had a subpar NFL career thus far. The list goes on and so what im saying is that judging by empirical data is not the best way to find talent especially if your going on the basis of a standardized test such as the SAT's. Jerry Rice by the way was the total package and was exceptionally gifted. By the context of your opinion on rice it seems as though you think rice had a subpar college career? FYI he was drafted in the first round and broke every major record for WR at his alma mater/conference. TO would've been a better person to use in place of rice. Also my personal opinion Larry Fitzgerald/Chris Carter/ and Jerry Rice best HANDS ever to play the game. Larry still has some proving to do but yeah hes got that good.
My point was that the 40 is clearly not a good way to measure productivity in the NFL, but continues getting used because it is easy for teams to measure and compare players in this way. Likewise with SAT scores - everyone takes the same test, and it's a number that is easy to obtain. I doubt it correlates very significantly with performance, although like the NFL where a 5.8 sec 40 couldn't play WR, I doubt an 1100 SAT could cut it in IBD. However, because it can be compared between candidates, it is used. My point was exactly the one you're making - it is not a good indicator, but just like prospects at the combine, as long as teams/firms will pay for a good score, it is certainly in your best interests to get one.
You're missing the point. There isn't room in PE for 6th and 7th rounders that may "break out" and be great workers. There are limited spots, so they're going to go to the ones that excel in the areas you can measure - such as SAT scores. There are probably plenty of great hires that have low SAT scores, but most PE firms will never give them a chance, so the Tom Brady example is all for naught.
Im not missing the point. I'm simply refuting the conventional standards of judging candidates by SAT scores. GMAT is far more relevant than the SAT's and personally Jimbrowning i would not take the SAT's over again. Wouldn't firms see some insecurity issues by taking the SAT's so late again? i think its a waste of your time my to C's.....Does KKR, BX, or hellman friedman check SAT's?
I think that what drexel is saying makes sense. He is basically saying that an SAT score will be asked for by all PE firms, regardless of GMAT score, and a high SAT score coupled with a high GMAT score would look a lot better than a "low" SAT score and a high GMAT score. I KNOW all headhunters request SAT scores, and I bet half of them barely even understand what the GMAT is, let alone how impressive a 770 is (not to come off cocky). A high SAT score would probably give me a better chance to get it passed on to the top PE firms.
Bro - do you think retaking the SAT and scoring a high-1500 score is worth it? It costs ~$45, which is nothing, and I wouldn't have to worry about studying because I don't think I'd need to.
Ugh... it seems that some version of this thread pops up every few months.
Some things on this whole SAT used for recruiting thing: - it's the easiest apples to apples comparison for raw intelligence that a firm has. Hate on it all you want, but find another nice, round number that is so normalized across school's grade inflations, courses, majors, etc. - SAT has a 50% correlation with intelligence. You will forgive me if I am skeptical when you claim you are an outlier and your low score truly doesn't reflect your intelligence. - would you REALLY not work for a firm that uses the SATs? I'm sure it feels nice to say NO to a firm for once after getting countless rejections from the recruiting cycle but let's be real - if Kravitz called you to wipe his ass tomorrow, you'd probably buy the Vault guide to ass wiping.
I think it's perfectly acceptable for firms to use SAT scores to weed people out. I wish they used GMAT scores (especially for my scenario), but ALL potential candidates have taken the SAT. So I understand that.
And no worries ideating, I understand your skepticism. When I was 16-17, I believe my score was more affected by the quality of English taught at my high school than my lack of "innate intelligence." I believe I was simply unprepared - I scored the same on verbal in 7th grade as I did my junior year of high school. It is slightly embarrassing, but I am past that as I have greatly improved my writing/English skills over my four years in college.
ideating, you seem to know what you're talking about. Would you recommend re-taking the SAT as a senior in college? I don't want to get passed over for opportunities due to a poor Verbal performance on the SAT when I was 16. What do you think? Thank you for your response.
Why do headhunters have this power i don't get it. I thought the whole purpose of going to b-school was to specifically get "recruited" for these mega funds. From personal experience i find head hunters incompetent and just downright grimy.
Headhunters hold the key to pre-MBA PE. PE funds pay headhunters to do their "recruiting;" headhunters filter out their candidates based on a list of things, and two of the things at the top of their list are test scores and prestige of employer (where one currently works). The PE firm says, "We want to interview x people," the headhunter gives them the best x candidates from their list, which, again, is based on numerous things.
Dipset, every single post you've had on this thread has been absolutely retarded. I'm not going to go point by point but take my word for it.
jimbrown - yes it would help. Few people do it though and if someone picks up on the fact that your score is out of 2400 while the rest of your cohort is on the old 1600 scale, you will have some explaining to do.
Ducimus enim harum praesentium iusto aut suscipit voluptas. Vitae et ea vel et et. Laudantium error nihil architecto et eos. Voluptas aliquid quidem et nobis.
Vel commodi ullam et blanditiis. Omnis quidem ipsam nulla consectetur est. Nostrum ut aliquid alias recusandae. Et excepturi rerum autem voluptates et.
Et rerum et aut modi ad qui ratione. Beatae omnis nihil quae et quos in sunt. Nostrum atque voluptatum est magnam totam. Laborum excepturi libero doloremque qui molestiae. Veniam ex dolorem laudantium voluptatem aut. Sunt et repellendus ab.
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...
Architecto explicabo et repellat fuga. In molestiae voluptas magnam architecto. Assumenda quae voluptates ipsam sed est.
Nostrum quis ut magnam. Earum possimus amet neque consectetur distinctio tempora. Repudiandae est eligendi eos dignissimos quidem eos. Maxime perspiciatis vel sint rerum.
Non corrupti occaecati saepe. Accusamus aspernatur qui vitae eligendi vero qui ipsa incidunt. Provident voluptatem et dolorum numquam. Quo excepturi natus repudiandae sit tenetur autem tenetur. Beatae expedita nam doloremque. Quis voluptatem odio quaerat non amet in nihil.
Quidem assumenda enim dolores fuga quas. Omnis explicabo qui et deleniti voluptatem. Quis illum sit quia ipsa necessitatibus.