UC Berkeley or University of Chicago
I am interested in a career in IBD I've just been accepted to both UC Berkeley and University of Chicago. I know that Berkeley has one of the best undergraduate business programs and University of Chicago has one of the best economic programs. In addition, U of C has career programs such as financial market and Chicago Booth Scholar Program to help with my career in IBD as well as getting into Booth. It seems University of Chicago is a better choice, am I making the right decision? If comparing UC Berkeley and U Chicago business programs, anyone knows strengths and weaknesses of these two programs?
If you want to work in Chicago then U of C is unparalleled. I would take Chicago even if you want to work any where else.
U of C. No doubt.
Berkeley would probably be a better college experience with almost equal placement as UChicago. My friend who is currently attending UC is absolutely miserable there and wishes that he chose any other school. You need a certain kind of personality to really enjoy Chicago whereas I feel like Berkeley could be a good fit for anyone. Just depends on the kind of person you are and how much money either school is offering.
UofC hands down wins here. I've attended both places, but I watched the undergrads when I was in b-school at Booth and felt a bit jealous of their experience. Tremendous place to enjoy your undergrad years. Also, don't take offense, but your career goals may shift while you are in school, and I think for almost every field you are better off at Chicago. Certainly this would be true for consulting placements, but also for any graduate level academic pursuits you might fancy. Tech is probably about a tie between the two. Congrats!
UofC hands down. Winters are rough and a lot of kids can be socially awkward, but outside of that I think UC>>>>>>Berkeley.
PM me if you want more detail or have any questions. I graduated from UC in 2012 so I can probably answer most questions you may have
UofC. Make sure you spend a summer in Chicago so you can experience a Stanley Cup celebration.
I haven't attended either but have only worked with grads of both schools and spent time recruiting at both schools.
My perception is that you will have a much better college experience at Berkeley. U of C will provide better career optionality and cache. Plus, given Berkeley's size compared to U of C, you'll face a lot more competition at Berkeley for those ibd jobs.
I've had friends who attended Berkeley and hated it there, and friends who were accepted who decided not to attend because they didn't like the feel of the campus and surrounding areas. So, a visit to both may be in order.
One other thing to consider, the Berkeley undergraduate business program is pretty impacted so you'll need to apply after your 2nd or 3rd semester just to get into the major. I'm not sure how UofC's econ program is, but if you go to Berkeley, prepare to go through the application process all over again.
I'd say Haas > U of C. I don't think there was a single kid from U of Chicago during my IB training (maybe 1?), and they have pretty poor representation on the street..
Haas (Berkeley) is a great name to have on both the Street and in San Francisco, especially. As a current student that went through SA recruiting less than three months ago, I know loads of students that are doing IBD at bulge brackets or elite boutiques in NY, SF, and LA. Even if you're not in Haas, you have a great chance of getting a great internship (a couple non-Haas majors are working at GS NY this summer).
In terms of overall experience, I could not have chosen a better school to attend. Berkeley is challenging, but pushes you to test your own limits and provides you with ample opportunity (social and professional).
Feel free to pm me.
Chicago > Haas in every objective academic metric
Tough call. Chicago is obviously the better school, but it's a cold place (no pun intended) and a spot where fun comes to perish. Still, I'd begrudgingly choose Chicago unless you were in-state for California.
Disclaimer: UC grad here. congrats on getting in to both schools, having those two options are incredible opportunities.
Although i would agree that Berkeley's b-school is a great opportunity (as is UVA, UT, Mich) - I think the QUALITY of education is far and away better at UC if you choose to pursue econ. I believe that the UC econ degree will open more doors (because of the school), and I would actually argue it is better represented in finance (outside of CA).
That being said, Chicago is cold. However - fun does not go to die there (i had a great time, you're in fucking chicago). The UCIB program essentially guarantees you a spot in IB, although its pretty easy to get placed without doing UCIB as well (main banks that recruit are JPM, GS, CS, UBS, William Blair, Baird).
As stated, neither is a bad decision though. Good luck.
Honestly, the difference between the two if you do well is marginal and definitely not "far and away better" like some of the previous comments have said (went to Berkeley, had friends at Chicago).
Even if you do Berkeley econ, the primary downside is the large classes and minimal requirements. It can essentially be as rigorous as you want it to be (thesis/graduate courses). The econ/business faculty at Berkeley is absolutely top notch and top students have the opportunity to work closely with professors on research/other projects. In terms of graduate school, Berkeley is definitely respected for having minimal grade deflation and difficult quant courses (though Chicago might be one of the few US universities where this is more so). As far as as recruiting goes, pretty much every bank/consulting firm in the Bay Area recruits on campus and every firm is filled with Berkeley alums. Again, the downside here is that there are so many Berkeley grads/students competing for the same jobs.
Not really in the position to offer advice but have you toured the campuses? I live right near Berkeley and have toured uChicago many times and Chicago's campus is much much prettier and nicer overall even though the surroundings aren't very safe. Also from what I've read Chicago is a better school. Berkeley's campus is sort of run down and trashy but its a completely different atmosphere than Chicago. It's not uncommon to see people walking down the streets with a bong or a handle and the town is sort of run-down but that is what makes it unique and why people love it, very laid back. I'd tour both and then chose because they don't really compare as far as campus life, also Berkeley is in the 60's year round basically. Disclaimer: I'm not trying to bash on Berkeley here, I'd probably go there over uChicago if I had the choice because I love the campus on surrounding town.
You should definitely take some courses at Booth, should be very helpful.
Current UofC student here:
I can't comment on the quality of education, campus.... vs Berkeley, but versus recruiting for Haas (from this board at least), UofC seems relatively lacking on the variety of banks that recruit here (i.e mostly BBs, some MMs, nearly nonexistant EB), so keep that in mind if you are really dead set on IBD.
This thread is obviously filled with U Chicago alums. I have personally seen more Berkeley alums in IB than UC's, although Cal has obviously a larger student body. Because of Silicon Valley's proximity, tech is absolutely much bigger at Berkeley, with perhaps only Stanford and MIT having a bigger presence. Also, even if you don't get into Haas, Berkeley's econ department is legendary. You get guys such as Emanuel Saez, David Card and Cristina Romer all teaching undergrad. At grad school level it's definitely top 5. That being said, it is a harder school and getting good grades is very tough, especially if you decide to take quant classes for which Berkeley is actually famous. Nobody will ever hold your hand, you will be on your own. I would recommend U Chicago just because of the latter, even if the undergrad experience is not as exciting.
You clearly know nothing about UChicago... You see more Berkeley alumns in IB because a) you have a dedicated undergrad business school and b) Berkeley is several times the size of UChicago (25K vs. 5-6K). I'll absolutely give you tech.
How is UChicago's econ program any less legendary than Berkeley's? If anything, you get the same caliber of faculty teaching much smaller undergrad classes. And UChicago Econ is most definitely top 5 at the graduate level.
In terms of grade deflation, UChicago is widely known to be an extremely difficult school with grade deflation. UChicago is also famous for its quant approach to everything.
Chicago, and don't look back.
UChicago vs. Berkeley for Banking (Originally Posted: 03/30/2012)
I'm a high school senior debating on either UChicago (economics major) or Berkeley (pre-business). For UChicago, I have to pay FULL sticker price (63K a year) while Berkeley costs $30-35k/year. For UChicago, my parents have enough saved to last me for three years, but in my senior year they will have to take out loans. For Berkeley, my parents have enough to pay up front and not take out any loans whatsoever. However, I'm assuming that I'll graduate Berkeley in five years instead of four due to the overflow of students and massive state budget cuts.
At UChicago I will join the Chicago Careers in Business (CCIB) and do their financial markets program, while at Berkeley I will have to apply for Haas my junior year. My concern is that at Berkeley I won't be able get relevant internships because there are so many students there (Berkeley has 25,000 undergrads; Chicago has 5,000) while UChicago has really stepped up its career services.
There's also the prestige factor: Berkeley and the rest of the UC's are going down the drain as California pulls more and more resources out of the UC system. UChicago, on the other hand, seems to be on the rise, currently ranked #5 (four-way tie) and in the process of adding an engineering school.
So my question is: Would going to UChicago be worth the extra ~100k?
EDIT: I've already finished applying for college and I got rejections from every Ivy. This year was a tough year for admissions. Also hoping to work on Wall Street.
go to UoC. no guarantee that you can get into Haas, its not easy.
Go to Berkeley, it's way more fun and about equal (maybe ever so slightly worse) for getting into banking. Plus your regional recruiting will come from SF instead of Chi, which in my mind is a plus.
Berghoff Beer vs. Sierra Nevada.
if i were you, i would take berkeley in less than a heart beat
Don't discount UCBerkley too much, it's a great school. If you can get into those two schools, why not try to get into an Ivy League school? Also, check out uMich-Ross.
You also have to consider that at UChicago you are competing with all the other ivies and targets. At Berkeley even if you don't get into Haas you are one of the top contenders on the west coast (only Stanford is above). Berkeley is right next to SF, allowing students to do school year internships there, which gives a huge advantage. Most of the top BB/elite boutique and MM IBD internships/positions in SF are dominated by Cal students
Berkeley
Is compensation on the West Coast and East Coast the same? I would assume East-Coasters get paid more, correct?
It depends..obviously in NY the pay is the best, but LA and SF are better than a lot of places
Pay at BB/Strong boutiques is the same across the nation. Just be a top performer and you will get paid.
Compensation depends on company, especially at the lower level you'd be entering at. Besides, unless you're working for some small regional boutique or an elite boutique, pay is pretty much the same. West coast much lower living expenses than NY though. I would go to Berkeley in a heartbeat. Although if you like one school over the other, go there. Career is 4 years off. Enjoy college, that's more important. You'll have plenty of opportunities either place if you work hard and network. True that UC system is going in the wrong direction, but Cal is still a premier school, and will be for a long time.
Berkeley hands down. Don't let the Haas application process affect your choice. Haas is more self selective than anything; if you really want to get in you will put in the required amount of work, take internships/join clubs/do extracurricular work, and get in fine. Each year the amount of students who are pre-business dwindles down and those who really are set on it and pull through freshman and sophomore year apply and get in. If you want it you'll get it. And, as someone said earlier, we really do dominate in SF banking.
I'm biased since I've been (and will continue to be) a grad student at UChicago, and I would still probably pick Berkeley for undergrad. Your out of pocket is less; schools are comparable - Chicago might have a slight edge, but not enough to justify the cost premium; the student life at Berkeley HAS to be better than Chicago. Granted, I'm only looking into the UChicago undergrad experience as an observer, but it looks fairly depressing. Chicago might position you slightly better on the national recruiting stage, but as others have pointed out, there are tons of opportunities on the west and those are dominated by Berkeley / USC / UCLA / Stanford.
I'd say Berkeley is your choice.
Berkeley, definitely. And work your butt off from day one to get into Haas Undergrad.
UChicago for banking. I haven't seen 1 analyst from Berkeley in my bank.
@Spectro, what city is your bank located in?
Thanks for the opinions guys, please keep them coming!
You would have to be retarded to choose Chicago in this situation.
Strangely, I'm leaning toward Chicago because I'm 100% confident a UChicago degree will appreciate compared to a Berkeley degree. Their new engineering school/institute is offering classes next year and I'm absolutely certain that in two years their acceptance rate will be down in the single digits. As for Berkeley, I feel the financial situation is perhaps the biggest deterrent, along with the large class sizes and the huge undergraduate population in general. In other words, I believe Chicago will have more prestige in the future similar to many top Ivies, and this will outweigh the extra $100k.
Are my points valid or are am I taking this from the wrong angle?
My goal is also to work on Wall Street, then perhaps returning to California later on.
i'm not really understanding the whole prestige thing. 20-30 years down the line i doubt anyone's gonna think you're a dumbass if you went to berk. when you're at a networking/social event, nobody's gonna say "but us news rankings said blah blah." don't think the difference in school branding will be the deal breaker to get you the bb job.. your gpa, class rank, ec, and network will determine that.
what your concern should be focused on is quality of education. i can tell you that while i was at berk, the edu quality was already whatevers. the admin is garbage. campus tech and facilities are good tho. didnt go to chi, but i do believe premium lies in edu quality and smaller class size. cali is broke as a joke, i don't know if it will get worse but i doubt it will improve.
if you're a resilient, focused, and hardworking person, save your parents money and go to berk. guaranteed better social life. i wont generalize berk but you can find anything there. but academics and competition wise, the odds are stacked against you BC more people are competing for same spots. i'd imagine chicago will be more conducive to you focusing on work tho.
If you have a gut feel one way or the other, definitely go with it. I said Berkeley mainly because the two are comparable, and Berkeley is probably more fun. But, I think it's likely Chicago continues to climb in prestige, and if you think that's worth the premium, go for it. One question - have you visited campus? Is Hyde Park some place you'd want to spend 4 years?
Berkley is in Cali. UChicago is where fun goes to die. Unless you are trying to stay in academia it is an easy choice for me.
Also, are you the oldest child going to college? Don't saddle your parents with the loans if you are. Lock in tuition prices at Berkley. If the state goes tits up you'll probably lose scholarships but the sticker price should be the same.
Only rankings that matter are placement based.
Let me repeat: California. There is no such thing as sweatshirt weather there. Think about it.
Bump
A couple things to consider (went to UChicago undergrad):
If you took any AP's at all, you likely won't have to do most (if not all) of senior year at UChicago. Most of my friends and I were done with classes by the first or second quarter of senior year, so you're saving ~13k in tuition each quarter you take off. A lot of kids either graduated early or went part time/leave of absence their last quarter or two. Also, you can move off campus after your first year here, and apartments are much, much cheaper than on campus housing (my rent in Hyde Park was like 400 a month). Don't know how this would compared to UC Berkeley so take from it what you will.
CCIB is by no means guaranteed. In terms of absolute numbers, it's not that selective (~40%? really unsure here) but on top of the workshops, it won't guarantee you interviews or anything except priority placement into Booth classes. Not getting into CCIB won't necessarily screw you though; my college roomie got a BB IBD gig even though CCIB turned him down.
A couple people in this thread have posted about how UCB is right next to SF, but I mean, that's kind of a moot point when compared to the fact that UChicago is like... you know, in Chicago (though kinda in the ghetto, but that's another discussion).
Sidenote: CCIB FM (Financial Markets) is geared towards the trading/money management crowd, so idk if that's what you're looking for, but if so, Chicago is like, prop trading capital of the world and a lot of prop shops offer tons of internships (both school year and summer).
Definitely some other downsides too, the weather, social life can be dead, academic work is brutal, but I can't really compare these qualities or anything else I've posted to UC Berkeley. I hope this stuff provides some things to think about though. Feel free to ask any more specific questions.
Did you visit the campuses OP?
UOC campus is in the middle of gang land
To me this really comes down to where you want to work. If you really want to be on the West Coast then Berkeley is a no brainer. If you want to be in Chicago then I would go there. If you want to be in NYC then you can get their pretty easily from both places and it would come down to personal preference.
Bump, can others comment?
Huh, you haven't mailed in the acceptance to Berkeley yet?
Undergrad- UChicago vs UC Berkeley (Originally Posted: 04/04/2015)
Picking between these schools. I am interested in both finance and consulting at the moment, but leaning towards finance (investment banking for M&A/TMT). Majoring in economics for UChicago, and pre-Haas at Cal. With scholarships, they both cost the same for me, where should I go? Also, from a purely recruiting standpoint, which one is better? Thanks!
Can't believe you're even asking this question,UChicago man! btw what are your ECs?
I had good stats and did business ECs at school
UChicago man. Recruiting for finance overall on the west coast is ultra-competitive, just because there are so few positions.
bump- having a tough time in picking between the two. Does UChicago have the better recruiting?
Yes, and it's not even close. Go to Chicago. In any case, Berkeley has one of the most obnoxious student bodies.
Quia voluptatem et blanditiis. Repellat placeat explicabo qui. Ipsa ut et aspernatur ut.
Qui quo exercitationem ipsam voluptatem. Et dolorem deleniti quo ab. Ut alias nemo ducimus nesciunt et neque. Vero natus molestias sit quis sequi. Molestiae iste eos nisi temporibus eum.
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...
Quibusdam quasi non accusantium voluptas. Placeat voluptas qui incidunt vitae sed repellat quod.
Iste et ut et ut soluta rerum. Doloribus itaque est sint inventore est quia. Enim accusamus quaerat tenetur molestias illum quidem dolor.
Dolor sit non reprehenderit unde aspernatur quaerat. Neque voluptate omnis deserunt. Enim est at illum velit nostrum.
Tempore quod rerum aut voluptates molestias rem sed. Earum laudantium qui consequatur facere sunt in qui.
Voluptates eum aliquid ea amet fuga autem. Quia ut culpa earum expedita dolore. Suscipit commodi modi dolores dolores nisi. Autem fuga deserunt architecto. Explicabo ab a velit ut laborum. Aperiam nobis omnis fuga repellendus quod dicta.
Placeat rerum atque accusantium error. Corrupti voluptatem eos ea fuga quia facilis et. Sint non corrupti sunt laboriosam officiis ipsa.
Quia a itaque voluptas quo a. Doloribus totam odit blanditiis minus. Ut nisi et doloremque adipisci placeat ut velit. Esse magnam labore voluptatem sunt sed maxime fuga mollitia. Nemo doloremque accusamus et.