So i had a question that i could not find the answer to through searching this board. I still have a couple years until graduating from undergrad with a finance degree. I wanted to know if a graduate school looks down on a finance undergrad degree applicant when considering them for a masters in finance program. I plan to work for a few years after graduation, but realistically i would want to go to MIT for graduate school in the long run as I really regret not applying there for undergrad to see if i could have gotten in.
Thanks so much for your responses, this may be a stupid question, but i really don't know a thing about graduate business school admissions.
Check out question #2 under the "Admissions" section of their FAQ page.
Furthermore, assuming your profile is accurate, I'm pretty sure MIT wouldn't look down upon a 3.5 in Finance from Wharton undergrad.
Most MSF programs look for finance undergrads. This isn't an MBA where they want well rounded applicants. This is a program that teaches graduate level finance.
If you go to Wharton I would focus on working and then getting an MIT MBA if you are determined to go to that school. The MSF is 80K and will place you as an analyst. Getting an MBA is a better idea past if you have some work experience.
just curious, why would you be placed in analyst-level if you graduate with a mfin?
thanks a lot, I guess i have to look up the difference between their mba and msf program. My profile is accurate, but i will restate that i still have 3 years to try and bring my gpa a bit higher, but i doubt i'll be able to bring it much higher than 3.6 but i'd be happy with that honestly.
thanks
@ anthony, regarding the MBA situation. I am somewhat hesitant to even get an MBA because the curriculum at wharton is nearly identical to the MBA program from wharton(for example, in 2 of my accounting classes and my 1 finance class so far, there were many mba's also taking the class) also, mba's take similar courses to management 100 which is one of wharton's signature classes that i believe mba's take separately from undergrads but is still roughly the same course i think.
So i feel that i am getting most of the benefits of an MBA in my undergrad education(if i'm wrong, please correct me) . My skillset is definitely more quantitative than liberal arts so that's one of the major reasons i'm considering the MSF from MIT. But that is somewhat deterring that the MSF would place me back into an analyst position, but i do think that if i get proper experience in trading(i think that trading is for me) i should be able to enter at a higher rank on the floor.
ps: i've taken a look at your blog, and i found it helpful. Thanks a lot
@ MR1234 - Most MSF/MFin students have no work experience so you typically get an analyst placement. Princeton does place some people as associates, but they have solid work experience and a lot of them have MBA's also. I would imagine that in a couple years you might see MIT brining in students with significant work experience and see them placed as associates.
It really boils down to standard practice. If you have 3-4-5 years work experience people historically went for an MBA and then in as an associate. Not saying that it the only way, but it has been the path of least resistance. I think a specialized masters degree is perfect for banking/finance, but recruiters and hiring managers have not caught up to my way of thinking yet. I mean if you plan on staying in finance only taking 1 year off vs 2 and getting a specialized, focused degree over a generalized degree makes a lot of financial sense. Problem is banking is not really that hard and as you move up they want more soft skills. MS in Finance students tend to lack these skills (unless learned on the job).
I predict that in the future you will see these specialized finance programs grow into real contenders. Higher education is costly in both time and money and I think the market is being flooded with MBA's. The top programs will not be hurt, but anyone who gets into a lower ranked MBA might as well just get an MSF. Most F500 companies do not distinguish better MBA/MSF, both are grad degrees in their eyes.
Once you see more top tier schools offering the MSF degree you will know we are near a tipping point. Princeton was the vanguard of this and MIT is now following suit. I don't think you will see a Wharton MSF since there is no need, but the schools around the perimeter (NYU, Georgetown, ND, etc) would all benefit from implementing a program.
Honestly, I am really surprised most of the top schools do not offer the degree. Especially with the downturn in the financial sector. They are extremely easy to start, you just have them piggy back off the MBA program. You can always field a solid cohort from the schools UG class and they are usually all profit.
A lot of times you see this with the MS in Financial Math or Computational Finance. The programs are housed out of the math or engineering departments. They are also great feeders into the schools PhD programs.
Anthony, thanks for the very informative post. I've been looking at some MFE and quantitive finance masters programs and they are definitely very different from the MFIN programs i looked at. Are Masters of financial engineering, masters of quantitative finance, and masters of mathematical/computational finance really the same thing? And are they tailored more to placement in trading/hedge fund quantitative roles, where as the masters of finance is much more general and would tend to place in all aspects of the industry. I'm going to look into MFE programs more, as that seems to be more my interest, as i don't think i'd enjoy ibanking as much as a trading career.
I definitely agree that the brand name of the school attended carries more power than the actual material learned in job hunting. I feel that a MFin from the brand name of MIT sounds more impressive to me than a MFE or whatever they call it from carnegie mellon(i believe that's considered one of the top MFE programs). I know if I were an interviewer, names like princeton and MIT would definitely stick out in my mind compared to Carnegie mellon, but perhaps that's just because i don't know enough about CMU's program.
Do you feel that the way the job environment is going, MFE's will be in higher demand than MFIN's in the future? Because I know that if MIT offered a MFE, i'm sure it would be one of the best in the world.
lot of misinformation on this thread ..... while some msf programs might be more interested in finance undergrads, the best programs (like princeton and mit) are much much more interested in graduates with applied math, engineering, etc degrees. this is because (no offense) finance undergrads are typically a lot less intelligent and a lot less able to do the quantitative heavy lifting required for the modern theory of finance (princeton's math refresher course covers brouwer fixed point theorem, poisson processes, etc)
also an mfin won't put you in any worse of a position than an mba as far as your coming in as an analyst vs associate. it's just that most students getting mfins don't have work experience, so they come in as analysts (standard practice is to call you a second or third year analyst if you come in with a masters and no work experience). someone with 3 years of experience and then going to mit to get an mba will get hired at the same level as someone going to mit to get an mfin after 3 years
also .... you can turn the programs at mit and princeton into MFEs if you want to since they're so flexible .... you'll just be missing a few of the really specific, practical classes (like how to price options with finite difference methods) you could take at columbia or carnegie mellon
and as long as you have As in classes like probability, linear algebra, etc then a 3.5 at wharton is a shoo-in for mit mfin
Whoa, I take major offense to your little "misinformation" shit.
Princeton and MIT are more quant focused. They have heavy finance requirements. This is plan and obviously. They are currently in the middle ground between an MSF and an MFE.
Most MSF programs look for finance undergrads. Not everyone, but this is graduate level finance. Suppose you were a finance student and got into a MA in History. Do you think you would be in for a steep learning curve? Of course.
Finance students are not "as smart" as engineering students, they have a different focus. Math and engineering students are great for the MSQF/MSCF/MFE programs because they are heavy on math and programing. Most people coming from those programs go into very specific roles in finance. An MSF will place you more broadly because it is focuses on finance as a whole and not just the programming/ trading roles.
You are correct about most MSF students not having work experience or very little. I mentioned that very point on a different forum.
All the information in this thread is very relevant and very spot on.
Here's my perspective from my research over the past week on all of these degrees and how they apply to me specifically.
Wharton's undergrad program is nearly identical to the MBA program in terms of classes(there are a few more mba projects required that undergrads don't do). an MBA directly or even 2 or 3 years after graduation would offer me nothing. In my opinion, and this is what i will voice to my employers, an mba would only benefit me 5/6/7 years down the line once i truly have the experience needed to take a new viewpoint on the course work. If i took an mba from any school less distinguished than wharton before getting this experience, i feel like it would not be very effective at all.
From looking over mfe and mfin programs, there are definitely major differences between the mit mfin and say a mfe from columbia or cmu. Personally the MIT mfin seems to require classes that i'm taking at wharton. Sure i'm sure they do provide a much more mathematical approach, but I would really only be doing the mfin at mit to brush up on some finance i didn't fully learn at wharton and to obtain the MIT brand name for my resume(i don't think any employer would frown on wharton and mit at the top of my resume).
The MFE definitely offers a ton of skills that i would never get at wharton. I can take comp sci at penn, but the financial aspects of programming and advanced statistics can't be learned in undergrad here. From looking at columbia and cmu's programs, i would definitely love to learn those skills for quant hedge fund work down the line(i personally feel that the ability to program and run trading algorithms is so much more important than having a mfin or phd from MIT and really only being able to teach and argue about the financial crisis with other scholars). MFE seem to focus on applied knowledge, and i think that is probably more my style. I do agree with the above point that they look for engineers and math students who have never taken the advanced wharton management, accounting, marketing, operations, and legal studies that i've already taken at wharton.
The difference between a math major or an engineer and myself is that they have only been exposed to the quantitative while i have been exposed to the managerial and analytical aspects of business and will have 3 summer internships at the premier target school for finance. That is the main reason why i am not really afraid of going in as an analyst after the mfin from mit. I have experience that most won't have. Many of my senior friends that graduated last spring were offered associate positions, so employers definitely see the similarities between the wharton undergrad degree and an mba.
But the MFE programs definitely look much much more interesting than any Mfin i've looked at, the only problem is that they're from lesser schools. CMU in my opinion doesn't have the brand power that MIT has, but i may be wrong.
Now that I have had time to re read your statement I will answer each section one by one. u
You do an MBA 3+ years after you graduate. MBA classes are a refresher, an option to network, learn from your classmates experiences. I know many Wharton MBA's as well as Wharton UG's and there is an absolute difference between the two. I think you would still take away a lot of relevant experience if you did an MBA later on. I would possibly advise maybe doing an MBA from a different institution so you get a new network and a different perspective
Masters in Financial Engineering is primarily math and programming based. A lot of schools house these programs out of engineering schools or math programs. The level of math is extremely high end and you have a very specific career focus. The MFin or MSF degree is more broad based. MIT and Princeton are in the middle of a MFin/MSF and a MFE. Their flexibility and broad curriculum is what really sets them apart.
The level of financial teaching and understanding between an UG in finance (or econ) and a masters in the subject is substantial. I would not consider a masters degree to be a brush up on the subject. Furthermore, 80K and one year of time is a lot to spend just to add another name.
While an employer might not frown on MIT or Princeton it will also not guarantee you an associate position. If you can get the job you want from UG then go for it. Having an MS degree from MIT or Princeton will still place you as an analyst unless you have the necessary experience. Their is a thread on here from a Princeton MFin student and he will confirm this.
There is a lot going on in this statement. If you go into banking with an MSF/MFin no one is going to care. You are still going to have to get an MBA. The MIT is brand new so I would advise waiting a year to see placement stats. As for other MFE program do realize that they place primarily into quant roles and no in banking. There is no need for MFE level math in banking. If banking is your goal go into it from the Wharton UG and then go for an MBA.
As for your experience that will set you apart at MIT, I wouldn't count on it. MIT's program is pretty competitive. You be a normal student in a program like that. I looked at the Princeton class profile and a Wharton UG would be a middle of the ground student in that program. You see a lot of advanced degrees, serious work experience, very quant backgrounds. You also risk fucking up your resume. The GPA that counts is your most recent. If you do very well at Wharton and go to MIT and get crushed you can kiss your chances goodbye. MFE programs are no joke and someone without the necessary background will either not be admitted or be at a huge disadvantage.
CMU is one of the best schools for computation finance. No question.Columbia/NYU/Chicago/UCLA , they all have very well respected programs. Prestige changes with the subject matter. CMU is the Harvard of comp finance.
Dude, if you want an MFE go to Columbia/NYU/UCLA/Chocago/etc.
Check out www.quantnet.com they specialize in those type of degrees.
BTW - CMU might have an "inferior" name to Wharton, but their MSCF degree is one of the best. Just about all top firms go their for their quant students. Don't always go by the name of the school.
Thanks a lot for reading my crazy long quote. I agree with what you're saying and am really thinking about it. My current goal is to go into trading, but what do i know? i'm still just a kid really and have plenty of time to experiment and may end up liking banking or perhaps consulting. I do definitely want to go somewhere other than wharton for mba. Wharton even says it discourages you coming back for an mba. The mit sloan mba looks interesting, but i haven't heard amazing things about it.
On a trip to shanghai this year i visited ATkerny and Mckinsey shanghai, they definitely did confirm what you say about the 2/3 years, then they send u off for MBA and you come back as an associate. I also honestly don't see the point of going back to school for only a year as adjusting to a new environment takes time and i believe that a 2 year stay is ideal and a nice break from the corporate grind. So I do definitely agree with what you're saying. I guess most mfin programs are more useful for those undergrads who took very little finance, like engineers, econ, and math majors.
That point about screwing up at these no joke mfe programs definitely is a concern to let 1 year ruin my hard earned undergrad credentials. I think the MFE will be decided by how good i am at trading and if i see that as my ultimate career choice, which i am still unsure of.
Thanks for your replies.
The final concern i have with this issue is that the MFE definitely pigeonholes as a quant, an unrespected programmer with little room to move up other than leaving and starting one's own hedge fund. Where an MBA may not be as concentrated as the MFE, however if from a good program, can place you in a position away from the grunt work and analyst crap i am trying to escape from. I think i'm going to look into more consulting type opportunities, but it just seems that consulting is sooo hard to break into.
thanks again.
Dude, I am pretty sure you can get into trading from Wharton. The MFE is going to place you in a specific role in trading, maybe not even as a trader. I would just rock out with your Wharton UG and see where it gets you. I am sure you will do fine.
Wharton undergrad >> all MSF programs except Princeton. You won't need to get an MIT MSF. It really won't help you much in the job search process over a Wharton BS/BA degree. Just get the degree and work and go to a top MBA program. If you can get the GPA to 3.6, are active in the community and have great WE you can go to Harvard and then have Wharton undergrad and Harvard MBA. Now THAT would be a ridiculous combination...
Wow definitely! thanks a lot for the responses guys. Yeah i think i'm thinking way too much in the future, i should concentrate on the here and now and enjoy it.
thanks!
I do have one final brief question for you guys. I was originally going to load up on relatively difficult classes to be impressive when it comes to jobs with skills like a comp sci minor(i haven't programmed much in my life, and the courses at penn aren't considered "fun") and statistics(considered the hardest concentration at penn) because i wanted to look very quantitative which i am. Now i'm really thinking about doing just finance and an easy math minor instead of loading up on crap like finance+stat+math+comp sci. I can definitely get a 3.6 if i only do finance and like fun classes like chinese(i'm really interested in china). That gpa is probs not gonna happen if i load up on that stuff.
from what i've heard about ocr and if i wanted to go to HBS(which i now do after looking at their site), i think gpa and having finance(what harton is so famous for) would be ideal for getting a job.
do you guys agree? Maybe keeping it simple and keeping my gpa above 3.5 would be the best and would be much less work and more fun.
thanks again
Reiciendis nisi veritatis quod iure quod qui quo. Nobis eligendi illo enim modi minima excepturi vel.
Ut tenetur aut dolores ipsa. Aliquid accusantium non laudantium sed facilis esse sequi. Dolores maiores in est repellendus sed quaerat sunt. Laborum non neque quaerat rerum voluptatibus. Autem assumenda provident cupiditate voluptatibus. Et voluptatem autem totam consequatur neque.
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...