Imperial MSc Finance VS LSE MSc Economic History
I took a break from studying dusty economic tomes to see if I could find any useful advice on good old WSO and found nothing of concrete relevance. Therefore I decided to initiate a new thread to get some of your thoughts on the issue at hand. I have offers for both these courses but am yet to decide which will serve me better given the following:
Background/Goals:
- Final year undergraduate studying Economics at a top university.
- I am by no means a top maths student. Decent but not great.
- Completed a Securities Spring Week at a Swiss BB.
- Completed a Summer Programme at a an American BB.
- Goal is to join a London trading/sales trading desk (not interested in CVA/IRS/inflation or anything too complex).
- I don't care for corporate finance or Research.
- Want to pursue a Masters degree to boost my employment credibility.
- Equally interested in studying globalisation/macroeconomic evolution and finance theory.
IMPERIAL
Pros
- Highly relevant and intersting
- Great placement rate in trading
- Highly regarded course
- Top quality dedicated careers service to the business school
Cons
- Price tag 27,500 pounds
- Extremely intense and rigorous
- High risk of bad performance/failure
- High failure rate
LSE
Pros
- World-class brand name
- Interesting course
- Less demanding than Imperial Finance
- 10,000 pounds cheaper than Imperial
Cons
- Less relevant
- Less technical
- Uncertain placement rate
I am fully aware of how different the two degrees are. I was declined a place at LSE MSc Finance (my first choice) but am equally as interested in pursuing economic history (my stated second choice)
Considering that this is graduate level study, can you advise me on which way to go? How would todays recruiters rate these two degrees in the hiring process? Would slaving through a year of hell at Imperial be worth the easier but (equally as effective?) opportunity cost?
The matter is quite urgent so any objective advice is very much appreciated.
Imperial, especially if you're going for S&T.
Thanks for your response Sonny. Would my prospects be significantly lower holding the economic history degree? Recall that i have no interest in highly quant roles nor ibd.
I stated IBD/HFT in order for you to understand the wide range (from basic numerical to highly complex) of roles the master's could offer you.
I wouldn't say they'll be lower as you'll have the LSE brand name. However, I would say Imperial's course would be infinitely more relevant if you're aiming for S&T.
is imperial msc finance good for equity research, or just s&t? anyone know?
I believe its good for both, but I think that very few are employed at the S&T department, given the current situation.
How important is one's final grade at the masters level from a university like LSE or Imperial? For example, how would a Finance degree from Imperial look if only a low 'Pass' was achieved?
Guys, I'm in a similar situation, but I have to choose between LSE MSc Finance and Economics and Imperial MSc Finance? What can you say about the "wow-factors" of LSE and Imperial, which one of them will look better on my resume? Which one will give me more chances to find a job in equity research in London given that I am an international student?
msc f&e is pretty quant oriented, it's a top course within the lse at the msc level, f&e students will occasionally get exclusive job postings from f&e alumni
lol you have no fucking clue.....
Could you please elaborate that? Are you saying the EH Msc is really demanding itself? Interested because I am also considering it :)
.
no fucking clue in the sense that Imperial finance really is ridiculous, or that LSE EH is much more demanding that I make it out to be?
i ended up appyling to imperial for finance and lse for f&e. hoping to end up in either ER or a phd finance program.
I've got friends in both programmes and both are basically not worth their money - you are paying for the brand name.
That said, I'd still go with Imperial if these are your only two choices, because it's at least relevant. Grades don't matter anyway, since you are interviewing for full time before you have received the majority of your grades and I have not heard of anyone who needed sth. higher than a pass in their contracts.
And why the MSc Finance at the LSE is so highly sought-after by applicants is beyond my recognition.
in your view then, which uni/courses are worth their money ?
I'd say that all the finance courses at LSE and Imperial are cash cows. If you are looking for trading, Imperial has more interesting courses on offer though, also taught by practitioners.
I guess that you will get interviews in any case though, no matter if you go to LSE or Imperial - it more depends on your background, i.e. relevant prior experience, especially in this market.
I don't know about Warwick's MSc Finance, but I would not want to live there. Oxford's Financial Economics MSc is even more expensive than Imperial's, but you got a more widely recognised brand name. It is very hard to get in though and I guess it is very theoretical. Other than that, there are no good options in the UK in my opinion, if you haven't worked before.
Neque harum dolorem ut voluptatem aliquid. Doloribus ut quo et perspiciatis ipsa iste voluptatibus. Ad accusantium nisi voluptas. Et mollitia accusamus dicta perspiciatis omnis nesciunt et porro.
Consequatur exercitationem doloribus omnis quas. Repudiandae neque voluptas consequatur ut inventore quisquam officiis nostrum. Placeat quibusdam quasi cum sed quaerat. Ducimus dolor est magnam ducimus dolorum odio distinctio quis.
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...