Top MBA or no?
Hello- I am well aware this topic has been beat dead on this website, and I have probably read all the threads on it, but I am still having a dilemma and feel like I need to solicit advice from fellow monkeys. Trying to stay anonymous so won't give too many details, but I have Big 4 CPA and sell-side equity research experience, and I am interviewing and hope to be accepted at a few top finance MBA programs (think Wharton/Booth/CBS). My ultimate goal is to work in buyside public equities, so basically long-only asset management or hedge funds. I know a lot of people on here shit on the MBA, but I come from a non-target so I feel like having that pedigree could help a lot, and not to mention I am already trying to network/interview for these roles and having a really hard time getting traction. I would just like to solicit opinions from people on here on if this is a good move or if I would be making a huge mistake dropping >$150K plus opportunity cost. Please help, I am open to any and all opinions. Thank you.
I don't think it's a huge mistake at all. A lot of the top LOs only hire analysts from three channels: 1) internal associate program, 2) laterals, and 3) MBAs. As someone shifting industries, the MBA maybe the best way in for you, especially if networking is getting limited traction and you get accepted to one of the top finance MBA programs.
I appreciate that, I guess I'm just thinking about the downside scenario. On a lot of other threads everybody else makes it seem like even if you go to a top school that it's a long shot to make it to the buyside if you don't have several years of PE or HF experience prior to your MBA. I appreciate that a top MBA is no silver bullet and I will have to work hard, but I am just nervous I will spend all this money, effort and time and won't get a buyside job. I have front-office finance experience and I am willing to work my ass off, I am just trying to figure out if that is enough to give me a great shot to land me where I want to go.
I think the idea of needing experience prior to MBA is grossly overstated. Of those recruiting for IM in my class, it was definitely less than half who had pre-MBA experience in PE/HF/MF. The recruiting process itself is also a bit of a self-fulfilling outcome because it's unstructured (at least vs. IB and consulting). If you really want to be an investor, you will be working hard on your pitches, participating in your student-managed fund, going to stock pitch competitions, etc. By the time on-campus interviews happen, the number of people who are fully committed to IM is whittled down substantially. The passion comes through in interviews, and those who have been the most dedicated to the process generally get jobs. Of course there is an element of randomness too, but it's far less of a crapshoot than MBA admissions in my opinion.
MBA is incredible - it's 2 years of partying around the world then off to a 6 figure job with a credential that, more or less, lands you interviews wherever you go in your career. Yes, very high real/opportunity cost, but there are scholarships. You're 27 and in the same mindset as when you were a junior in college except now you have money and can drink and have massive swaths of free time where no one expects you to earn money or work. It's unreal, and I can't recommend it highly enough.
Haha I have no doubt that getting my MBA will be a lot of fun, just trying to figure out if it's worth the ROI and risk reward.
I went to one of those schools you listed, there's a pretty defined pipeline into those kinds of funds, especially with ER experience, but admittedly it's not as much as a sure-thing as other industries.Most of the large AM shops recruit 1 or 2, plus many students will leverage the alumni to make inroads at small funds. Frankly, I think MBA is a much more effective way to switch into what you're looking for than just going it alone and trying to break in as a lateral : there are just more options made available to MBAs, while I feel that lateral route puts you in a position to just take what you can get. Also, the credential will take you far. Obviously biased, but thats my $0.02
Guy, you're in the AM forum, and I think that's going to get you more negative responses than IB.
In my public AM job? a MBA is either a non entity, or an easy signal that you're a d--k if you put it in your email signature or on your business card. The CFA Charter is probably the currency of choice with the FRM as #2. Financial Math MAs or something similar will probably get you further as well. Personally I'd pick one of those MAs from a good state school over a H/W/P MBA to push myself forwards. Programming classes are a good call too. You're likely to be chugging data, so efficient processing is a big deal. You may think that learning something like Python will signal that you're an IT grunt, but it's actually a big deal in Quant AM.
Oh, look we've got several bu**hurt guys who threw away $200k and two years of earnings throwing monkeyshit at me. I dare any of you to present a valid counterargument. What part of what I said is wrong? In AM teams are small, and a lot of those teambuilding techniques are wasted. Any investment team, macro or micro is going to care more about those who know what they're doing than the others.
The value of the MBA has nothing to do with gaining skills in my opinion. In fact, the educational aspect of the MBA isn't helpful at all to becoming an investor (it's arguably a detriment). However, the MBA presents a recruiting channel into IM that isn't available anywhere else. The CFA charter won't come close to giving that kind of opportunity.
I mean, I'm here. I know who has what. MBAs are pretty scarce in AM. I'd say that at least half of the people on investment teams around here either have or are working towards their CFA charters though. We're big, so I've got a decent sample size. Probably N >50, and that's just who I know personally. I know maybe three MBAs, and the two MA/MS guys in financial math are much more impressive.
I think the disconnect here must be regarding the type of role we are talking about in AM. My understanding is the OP is looking for a fundamental research analyst role at a HF or LO. In that case, the MBA is a great way to make the leap. I have worked as at a $10B+ HF and a $500B+ MF and can say that the MBA is very common, especially at MFs. If we look at firms like Fidelity, T. Rowe, Wellington, Capital Group, Dodge & Cox, etc., most research analysts will have an MBA.
When you say you're there, I had the impression your work was more around structuring ETF products, so close to a front office role in an ETF team. Then yeah, I agree that you won't find many MBAs there, hence why you also mention FRM as a common designation.
If you'd look at fundamental teams, it's a whole different story. In my team (Fundamental Equities) at a pension fund, approx. 50% of us have MBAs and 80% CFAs. The ones that don't have CFA or MBA all have masters or Phd. Nobody has FRM. A lot of the PMs and analysts that I meet at company visits or conferences also have MBAs. So the OP's question is valid and the answer is: AM and HF recruit from top MBAs, there is an active channel. You don't absolutely have to have buyside experience (I didn't for example). Just if you want to work for an ETF shop, then an MBA probably won't help that much.
What about a program like the value investing program at CBS, it seems like that would add value knowledge wise. I have even seen people go into that program and start a fund immediately after, why wouldn't they just skip the program if it added no value to their investment framework?
For your situation specifically, I think MBA could make sense, as long as your targets are explicitly HBS, GSB, Wharton, Booth, CBS. That's probably it.
The folks on the thread are right: other than CBS Value Investing program (which is a separate application once you get into CBS, very selective, they choose 40 ppl out of a class of 800 i think), you won't learn much in the classroom. What you are buying are a few things:
To sum up, try to get your GMAT solid and shoot for only these schools, it will still be competitive but with pre-MBA sell-side ER experience, you are in a very competitive position relative to your future classmates.
This is great insight. Would you add Yale to that list? I'm on the BB IB -> PE track and deliberating business school as well. I want a long-term career in PE and was thinking about only applying to HBS/Wharton/Columbia/Yale/Tuck. Would you add/subtract anything from that list?
I don't want to be a pretend expert on non-public market path. I think your MBA school list can be larger than OP's case. Whether Darden or Yale SOM or Tuck is best for your purpose, I just don't know, sorry. Obviously, still try to go to the best school for finance since your purpose is PE. Hope this is somewhat remotely helpful.
Corporis non enim ratione autem aut consequatur optio. Id qui aut ut dolorem consequuntur iusto nihil. Exercitationem omnis incidunt optio libero soluta quis laudantium.
Magnam cumque ea vero sunt consequatur cumque. Vero ab non consequatur nulla velit corrupti. Voluptas voluptas soluta nam odio et. Eos optio quis rem perspiciatis. Exercitationem magni et dolorem dolorem a consequuntur. Eum deserunt cumque repellendus aliquid dolorem exercitationem.
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...