Medium-tier MM Full-Time Offer vs. Medium-tier Masters in Finance
This is a hypothetical question.
Rising Senior at a non-target. Just completed SA stint with a medium-tier MM bank (Stifel Nicolaus, Stephens Inc., Keefe, Bruyette & Woods, Imperial Capital, etc.). Gets an offer for full-time following senior year.
This person then applies for Masters in Finance positions and gets into some respectable ones (Villanova, USC, Vanderbilt, UT Austin, Johns Hopkins, etc.).
What should be done?
Should he/she forgo the FT offer in favor of the MFin? There is a possibility that the MFin + previous IB experience can get an SA offer at a EB or BB.
Or should he/she take the offer and forgo the one/two extra years of school? There is a possibility that the middle tier MFin won't lead to any "higher" banks than the previous SA stint.
100% MM offer. Work for a year or two and then try to lateral to another bank if you want to - you'll end up in the same (or better) place but will be EARNING money and have a guaranteed job rather than spending money for a degree that may not lead to a better outcome for you.
Good point. So you don't think the "rebranding" school-wise is worth it?
More questions for you: How do you lateral? Is it possible to do as an Analyst, or does it need to be from Analyst -> Associate?
Don't most people apply to B-school after the two year Analyst period? What if the lateral doesn't work out and the applications to B-school come from the medium-tier MM firm (instead of, potentially, a "better" firm after the MFin)?
Wouldn't the extra money and time spent on the MFin be worth it if it led to a "higher ranked" bank and, therefore, a "higher ranked" B-school?
I realize this may be splitting hairs, but I appreciate your feedback.
Understand the confusion - I was in a similar situation in choosing between a lower ranked BB (guaranteed FT offer after SA) and higher ranked BB (SA following summer with no guarantee of FT). I picked lower ranked BB (for a number of reasons, actually).
In order:
1) You can lateral analyst ---> analyst, or analyst --> associate. If you're moving from a mid tier MM bank to a BB, you may "lose a year" (ie do your first year at the MM bank and then move to the BB as a 1st year analyst). Not a huge deal in the big scheme of things (esp. if another option is paying for an MFin).
2) No. Average is 4-5 years work exp. before b-school. B-school apps are only so much about brand name, and are more about your contribution and individual tasks etc - if you are a rockstar analyst at a mid tier MM versus an average analyst at a BB (not saying that's what that equates to, just possible scenarios) you'd likely have a better shot at a top b-school from the mid tier MM. Point being mid tier MM experience won't kill b-school apps at all. I know this because I have done extensive research on the b-school process (as I will be applying in a few years too).
3) Not necessarily - especially because starting at a MM could (probably more easily) lead to a "higher ranked" bank. Experience trumps additional school. Also, no guarantee that the MFin (esp. if not a top target program) would lead to a higher ranked bank at all. Search around on WSO - I've actually seen threads where Villanova MFin students were complaining that they were disillusioned by the process and found it extremely difficult to land IB jobs etc.
One thing I'll clarify - if you really, really wanted to go straight to a higher ranked bank and have the opportunity to do a MFin at Princeton (unlikely for most) I'd take that over the MM. Otherwise, almost universally, MM in my opinion.
Thank you for the clarification. That explains a lot.
Say you want to lateral after one year, would you follow the regular recruiting cycle? How would you spin your experience at the MM and justify transferring to a BB or EB?
Got it. Makes sense.
So from the perspective of applying to BB/EB analyst positions: one year at a medium-tier MM bank > medium-tier MFin one year at a medium-tier MM bank
I don't think you'd follow the traditional recruiting cycle, but it'd probably be a similar start date etc - more like you'd network and try to get interviews for openings in certain groups. Perhaps they'd put you through the regular FT recruiting process, not sure about that.
I think there's a bit of subjectivity re: one year MM
I haven't done much research on MFin programs either, but to echo what @"notthehospitalER" said, I think you'd be better off going FT with the MM bank and doing a stellar job there, allowing you to earn money and build experience rather than banking on re-branding now and 'possibly' being able to move to a EB or BB that way. Remember, "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush." Build great experience at the MM bank and continue to network and I think you will be able to lateral into the other banks in the future. That's my 2 cents.
[quote]3. So from the perspective of applying to BB/EB analyst positions: one year at a medium-tier MM bank > medium-tier MFin one year at a medium-tier MM bank IBD offer, but it's not worth $100K of tuition and a year's worth of savings/career.
It really depends on what you want to do.
Princeton has gotten PE placements for students with prior IBD experience and Blackstone will usually interview a few of our students every year. But many of our graduates wind up as quants in some capacity or another. Some doing sell-side portfolio/strategy research, some working in S&T at banks, some working at funds like GSAM, JPAM, Bridgewater, Kepos, AQR, and Citadel. (GSAM and Citadel were particularly huge in my graduating year.) There are also some IBD and research placements, mostly at BBs. Every couple years, someone will go to a management consulting firm.
The story looks similar at CMU and Columbia, except that they're much more focused on quant roles than Princeton is. The program likes to think of itself as more of a hybrid between an MFE and an MBA.
My take is that if you have the applied math background- (linear algebra, multivariable calculus, calculus-based probability) and want to be a quant- or if you are having second thoughts about IBD, the first step here is to take the GREs and see if you can get a 165Q or better.
If you're sure you want to work in IBD, a mid-tier MFin isn't worth the tuition, and a top tier MFE is largely geared towards helping you get a quant job (though it can get you a job as a structurer working in IBD, which can sometimes be a nice gig). MIT is somewhere in-between mid-tier and top-tier and places people into IBD and consulting a little more often, but I'm not sure it's worth it for your situation.
Best of luck in your decision. Feel free to reach out if you have any questions. My view is that this is a quant vs. IBD decision. MM IBD is a much bigger coup than what I got out of undergrad, so your career seems to be off to a great start.
TLDR: If you want IBD, take the offer. If you realized you hated IBD this summer, let's talk about grad school.
Thanks for your feedback.
In my MFin search I've only been looking at "pure" MFin degrees, as I don't have a strong math background. As of right now I have little interest in becoming a quant. This is why I mainly asked about the "pure" MFin degrees (CmK, Villanova, Vanderbilt, LSE).
I think Columbia and Princeton wouldn't really fit what I'm looking for.
"If you're sure you want to work in IBD, a mid-tier MFin isn't worth the tuition, and a top tier MFE is largely geared towards helping you get a quant job"
--> This is my take-away.
Although, I do believe there are some top-tier "pure" MFin degrees, but they are mainly international. The ones in the US would probably be MIT, CmK, Vandy, WashU, and maybe USC.
So just to summarize... For somebody looking to go into IB:
MM IBD FT Offer > Medium-tier "pure" MFin (Villanova, Purdue, Boston College, etc) MM IBD FT Offer >= High-tier "pure" MFin (Vandy, WashU, CmK, etc) MM IBD FT Offer = Top-tier "pure" MFin (LSE, MIT, HEC Paris, etc)
@"notthehospitalER" @"The Golden Penguin"
Appreciate the feedback.
Your comments make a lot of sense. I guess I was just trying to figure out the priorities here. Honestly I didn't think much about the possibility of laterals between banks, but after cruising LinkedIn for a bit it seems like there are people that do it.
100% take the MM IBD. You can leverage this experience to go to a bigger firm if you want or maybe you'll be happy in the middle market. It's not worth the cost and/or risk to forgo this opportunity to get a masters that will most likely place you in a very similar role.
Take the job. work experience is definitely more valuable at this stage.
I did the MSF at WUSTL in a similar, if not identical situation, and regret it from a professional perspective. Had a great time, learned a lot, etc, but I could have done without the debt.
100% take the full time offer. I honestly don't think the master's would help much to secure a full time position anyway. Would rather hire undergrad students through the typical recruiting process than someone who is older or more experienced with a master's degree, since they would be coming in as first year analysts with their peers. Also if it's a one year program then you wouldn't have an internship. The strong preference is to hire someone who went through the internship process (can be from a different bank) as it mitigates risk, at least for top-tier banks where we can be more selective.
Take the job. Screw school.
Maxime sit alias modi autem voluptatem eos provident beatae. Doloribus voluptas dolorem sed eaque nam aut.
Veritatis voluptatem possimus at vero nesciunt accusamus. Cupiditate et architecto fugit dolorum.
Eius dolore sed doloribus et. Cumque soluta quaerat optio. Repellendus sint exercitationem cumque aut illum non non. Quidem libero laboriosam qui error dolorem aliquam molestiae tenetur. Eos quis occaecati voluptatem sed occaecati et.
Tenetur sed et aperiam earum cum. Nesciunt quae ipsam sit nam. Commodi unde ex odio est fugiat aliquam. Voluptatem iste non quos dolorum. Cumque et ducimus ratione eveniet et. Sed occaecati odit qui voluptatem ipsam.
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...