Wharton vs. Columbia vs. Booth

Hi, I wanted to hear some opinions on these three schools for banking recruitment. I'm probably looking to do 2 years in Investment Banking in NY in a BB and then come back to Brazil to work in PE Megafund.

Current BG is 2 years in ER at a local bank and 2 years in PE/ Impact Investing

The way I see it

Wharton: Pros - More elite for PE job medium term, Stronger network in the region and stronger academics - Cons Living in Philly for two yeras

Columbia: Pros- Being in NYC for networking with bankers 24/7, Strong recruitment in BB IBD (Goldman, Citi) Cons: Living in NYC is really expensive, Campus is terrible

Chicago: Pros- Living in Chicago, Strong recruitment and careers office, Reputation on the rise Cons: Insignificant network in PE

Thanks for your thoughts all!

WSO Elite Modeling Package

  • 6 courses to mastery: Excel, Financial Statement, LBO, M&A, Valuation and DCF
  • Elite instructors from top BB investment banks and private equity megafunds
  • Includes Company DB + Video Library Access (1 year)

Comments (252)

Nov 19, 2014 - 9:15pm

For banking as I'm sure you'll hear others say, you'll be fine from any of those schools - one thing I would caution you against: being in NYC may not be a pro all the time - I've heard people say being in NYC for MBA is annoying because you're basically expected to be networking with bankers all the time - awesome if you like it, not so much if you're just doing it to get a job. If you are away from NYC you will still have a good shot at getting a banking job from any of those schools but may not be pressured to network as heavily.

Nov 19, 2014 - 9:46pm

Awesome, I didn't see it that way. Do you think there may be a difference though in my medium term career plans of going back to PE in Brazil with any of the selected schools? I think that more of a difference may be there regarding curriculum, network and brand recognition. Maybe Booth lags a little bit on this front? How's the BB IB recruiting at Booth as a separate note, I've heard career services is strong but I got the feeling when I talked with students that most of them found positions at boutiques rather than BB firms, I dunno just got that impression (maybe a Boothie can shed some light here)

Nov 19, 2014 - 11:46pm

Can't really comment on medium term PE prospects. Maybe @"Dingdong08" can chime in here.

From everything I hear Booth is now considered by many to be a close 4th behind Wharton - you will have the same BB IB opportunities at Booth that you will elsewhere unless I'm mistaken.

Nov 19, 2014 - 10:35pm

When it comes to BB IB recruiting, I don't think there's much of a difference (if at all) among any of these schools, or even if you expand the list to include H/S, as well as MIT/Kellogg and maybe even a few more slightly lower down the list. BB IB really just needs warm bodies, and as the saying goes - it ain't rocket surgery.

No idea about the situation in Brazil, though.

Nov 20, 2014 - 12:41am

For BB recruiting, little difference between the 3 schools. For PE, it's Wharton all the way. Some additional factors and thoughts:

In my personal opinion, if you get into Wharton or Booth, you should not even consider Columbia because I think the school is in serious systemic decline and has fallen far behind Wharton and Booth. Those 2 schools have stronger reputations in finance, better career services, more prestige, higher caliber of students, and a socially more cohesive student body. And of course, living in NYC as a student sucks monkey's balls. It's super expensive, and CBS students have no social prestige or clout in NYC since the city is packed with finance ballers. It's nothing like the respect that Wharton and Booth students get in Philly and Chicago respectively.

Living in a sleek highrise luxury apartment in downtown Chicago while attending one of the world's most elite business school is truly awesome. Giving that up for the filth and grime of NYC and Uris Hall would be a huge mistake.

Learn More

300+ video lessons across 6 modeling courses taught by elite practitioners at the top investment banks and private equity funds -- Excel Modeling -- Financial Statement Modeling -- M&A Modeling -- LBO Modeling -- DCF and Valuation Modeling -- ALL INCLUDED + 2 Huge Bonuses.

Learn more
Nov 20, 2014 - 9:03am

Does anybody want to comment on Booth's network globally and specific presence/expertise in the PE industry? I seem to get the feeling that it is not as strong as Columbia's in these two fronts. I also know that the curriculum is not that important but I get the feeling that CBS provides much more opportunities to have hands on experience on the industry (PE program, Deal Camp) than what Booth offers (They have some nice contests though but I haven't really met anyone that has done them- IPO challenge, Sterling Partners competition) - and maybe only 1 or 2 courses directly related to PE ---> Entrepreneurial Finance and Private Equity.

Nov 20, 2014 - 10:12am

jlgdr1987:

Does anybody want to comment on Booth's network globally and specific presence/expertise in the PE industry? I seem to get the feeling that it is not as strong as Columbia's in these two fronts. I also know that the curriculum is not that important but I get the feeling that CBS provides much more opportunities to have hands on experience on the industry (PE program, Deal Camp) than what Booth offers (They have some nice contests though but I haven't really met anyone that has done them- IPO challenge, Sterling Partners competition) - and maybe only 1 or 2 courses directly related to PE ---> Entrepreneurial Finance and Private Equity.

If u check mbavsmfin's past thread, you would find he is trolling CBS all the time and u should only take his words with a grain of salt. Can't say about Brazil but in Asia CBS leads Booth by a big margin. It is partly due to the fact that super rich families send their kids to ivy not geeky schools like uchicago. I suspect it is same elsewhere in emerging market. So I would pick CBS over Booth any day.

Regarding Wharton vs CBS, the only advantage CBS has is Asset Management/value hedge fund placements thanks to its value investing program. Therefore I would recommend picking Wharton based on your career goal.

Disclaimer: going to CBS next fall. didn't apply Booth.

Nov 20, 2014 - 10:34am

Awesome thanks youayou! Are you aware of CBS reputation in PE? I've heard that its next after H/S/W, they definitely have a strong network in Wall Street and some big names in the industry overall. I think they do a good job placing kids in the industry (acknowledging how difficult it is) and they offer many opportunities as the ones I mentioned in my previous post. Also, I find that they have very strong ties with firms GS, JPM and Citi historically, whilst on the other hand I kinda get the feeling that Booth does everything they can (and that means investing $$$) to catch up with these employers (which is working) but the network may be not quite there yet.

Any further thoughts? Are guys in WS likely to pick between two similar candidates just because more people in their firm are CBS alumns rather than Booth alumns? I believe this is certain in some places...

Nov 20, 2014 - 1:26pm

What parts of my CBS post do you disagree with?

1. It's indisputable that Booth has been on a rising trajectory since David Booth's donation. Aside from gorgeous sleek Harper Center (Uris is so disgusting; my public high school had better facilities than CBS), Booth has significantly revamped its career services, established strong centers in marketing, tech, entrepreneurship, and has been absolutely dominating CBS in the rankings. If you read GMAT Club, the vast majority agree that Booth is better and pick Booth over CBS quite handily.

2. In finance, Booth is more well regarded, especially in Asset Management. This is due to Booth's intense rigorous finance courses. The analytic finance concentration at Booth, for instance, blow away CBS's finance courses.

3. Despite not being in NYC, Booth's buyside placement is at the very least on par with CBS. I agree that the latter has an edge in NYC based long-short equity hedge funds. You continue to trump up the value investing program, but that is highly selective since it's reserved for just 40 people per year. If you don't get in, a lot of the courses won't be available to you. The exceptions are the regular "value investing" course, (which isn't that helpful), "Security Analysis," (decent course but wildly dependent on the professor), and "advanced investment research," (which requires an application and is also selective to get into).

4. Finance OCR at CBS was weak this year. Not that many firms came to campus (mainly middle-market and boutique banks), and they had very few interview slots given the school's size. Booth's OCR is a lot stronger. (Also you can use bid points to land interviews at Booth while at CBS you can't).

5. CBS' Early Decision and J-Term greatly dilute the quality of the student pool. There are no "shortcuts" or "back-alleys" to get into Booth full-time. You have to compete with an intensely impressive pool of applicants during the regular rounds.

6. Regarding my last point. Yes, NYC is a terrible place to be a student as compared to Chicago. We're talking about 2 years of no income in America's most expensive city. And socially, CBS students don't enjoy the same level of prestige and respect that Boothies and Whartonites get in their respective cities. In NYC you're a nobody if you're a lowly student. Even if you're at CBS.

Nov 24, 2014 - 11:41am

youayou:

jlgdr1987:

Does anybody want to comment on Booth's network globally and specific presence/expertise in the PE industry? I seem to get the feeling that it is not as strong as Columbia's in these two fronts. I also know that the curriculum is not that important but I get the feeling that CBS provides much more opportunities to have hands on experience on the industry (PE program, Deal Camp) than what Booth offers (They have some nice contests though but I haven't really met anyone that has done them- IPO challenge, Sterling Partners competition) - and maybe only 1 or 2 courses directly related to PE ---> Entrepreneurial Finance and Private Equity.

If u check mbavsmfin's past thread, you would find he is trolling CBS all the time and u should only take his words with a grain of salt. Can't say about Brazil but in Asia CBS leads Booth by a big margin. It is partly due to the fact that super rich families send their kids to ivy not geeky schools like uchicago. I suspect it is same elsewhere in emerging market. So I would pick CBS over Booth any day.

Regarding Wharton vs CBS, the only advantage CBS has is Asset Management/value hedge fund placements thanks to its value investing program. Therefore I would recommend picking Wharton based on your career goal.

Disclaimer: going to CBS next fall. didn't apply Booth.

This is a good point, I was waiting for someone to bring it up. The above mentioned schools are actually the only schools I would ever consider going to for an MBA.

Wharton for obvious reasons.. I would actually choose Wharton over Harvard (Consider against Stanford since I am a West Coast kid and would choose Stanford if I wanted to return to the West Coast.. though Wharton still has a presence in Cali)

Booth actually has a very strong presence in PE and IB, they also have several notable classes/professors with Rx and Distressed backgrounds which is a big + for me and thus why its on the list.

And as the guy above mentioned Columbia has the Value program. From what I have heard though, unless you go in with Buyside/Relevant experience it isn't an automatic ticket to a Hedge fund, and even with the experience it isn't guaranteed.

All 3 can get you into PE but in general the kids that go MF after an MBA did MF Pre-MBA and are going back to their Pre-MBA funds or are switching funds. All 3 have stellar placement into all levels of IB (EB & BB).

Nov 20, 2014 - 12:37pm

BTW, I agree with someone's comment above that CBS's location is not necessarily an advantage to banking. While other bschool candidates may only need to do off campus networking/coffee chat/informational interview several times, CBS candidates are expected to meet with bankers all the time. I heard the experience is exhausted if you don't enjoy networking. Though you could argue that knowing more people/group/deals give you some advantages at work.

CBS's location advantage really comes into play for those want to break into industries with no structural OCR such as hedge fund. Many people I know in CBS who are pursuing AM jobs are doing relevant school year internship and networking with PM intensively.

Nov 20, 2014 - 3:24pm

I think it's pretty uncommon to get megafund PE out of any of these three schools. On the other hand, it's fairly easy (and by easy I mean common/standard assuming you put in the effort) to get top tier banking roles out of any of these three schools. I personally have never thought of CBS as on the same level as Booth/Wharton, primarily based on my own perception of maybe the 5-6 coworkers I've seen attend over the years, but that is just one person's opinion with serious sampling issues. I think the early decision really hurts the overall caliber of their pool.

In general, I think the academics at either Penn or Chicago are best-in-class, recruiting for IB/consulting/AM is best-in-class, and entrepreneurship support would be strictly better at Chicago/Wharton than CBS/NYU/Tuck/Kellogg/Haas, but strictly worse than Stanford or MIT (not sure about HBS). I'd also seriously challenge the whole quant/passive thing for Booth investors vs. value at Columbia. That is nonsense. There were 50 kids in my class that recruited for AM/HF and I think 2 went to DFA, and zero went to a completely passive shop. Everyone thinks that the EMH is horseshit and the beauty of Booth is it gives you time to really challenge that and emerge with fact-based evidence for why you think markets are inefficient. I think that's a prerequisite if you want to be a professional investor.

Disclaimer: Booth alum

Nov 20, 2014 - 3:43pm

Very well said. I too have talked to finance people about this, and almost all of them regard Booth as a higher caliber school than CBS. Even my non-finance friends, when asked, have told me "of course booth is better than columbia." I also know multiple hedge fund and AM professionals who think CBS students are too obsessed with the value investing paradigm and are basically Buffett/Einhorn/Klarman wanna-bes while they regard Booth students as deeply cerebral analytical problem-solvers who challenge the status quo.

Booth's OCR is second to none; they get more companies to visit than CBS and allocate more first-round interview slots despite a smaller class.

With regards to entrepreneurship, Booth has beefed up big time in this aspect while CBS' Eugene Lang Center for Entrepreneurship is struggling to get things going. The Wharton blogger, MBAOver30, who will be doing a startup after school, applied to Booth but did not even consider CBS.

Finally, Booth students KILL it with not just quant funds such as DFA, AQR, and PIMCO but also long-only mutual funds such as Wellington, Fidelity, T Rowe Price, Capital Group, Franklin Templeton. I'm pretty sure Booth has sent more students to these funds than CBS has over the last 5 years.

Nov 20, 2014 - 3:56pm

Two things here. First, I guess lots of people (non-finance friends) just read GMAT Club too much or rely too much on rankings. Not sayin' that CBS is better than Booth, but I'd be careful to talk to anyone outside finance to give me a fair opinion about both schools.

Second, I agree with you but "Booth students as deeply cerebral analytical problem-solvers who challenge the status quo." ---> This is so "Why Booth" cliched answer. Haha I know there has to be better reasons than this!!

Nov 20, 2014 - 4:51pm

Just as a general question with kind purposes: Does anyone find that Booth > Wharton in any aspect? I find these two program strikingly similar: Strong academics, flexible programs, tight knit community, great faculty, strong finance education. Maybe a point in favor of Wharton is its global profile, I don't think Booth offers that many opportunities in that end. Anything else they might differ in or where one school beats clearly the other one?

Nov 20, 2014 - 5:08pm

1. Wharton is stronger in PE, tech/startups, and has a stronger brand globally.
2. Booth's curriculum is more flexible since they don't have any required courses except the mandatory LEAD during orientation. However, Wharton allows you to exempt out of core classes through an exam.
3. Wharton's student body is more diverse in terms of % of internationals and women.
4. I think Wharton is more fun than Booth although Booth is no slouch in that category either. Both schools are more socially cohesive than CBS.

Nov 21, 2014 - 3:56am

I'll keep this brief as it has been discussed a ton for a couple years now. Note, I am a Booth student doing Private Equity.

For investment banking, in ANY city, all three schools will open up every single door to you. There won't be a single employer who won't interview you due to your school. Furthermore, you WILL be able to get an investment banking job, and it will very likely be at a BB or other top-notch shop if you're willing to put in the effort to network, prepare, and you speak English well. Investment banking is not an elite or hard to obtain job at the top schools -- it is just another option.

Private Equity outside of the U.S. is totally hit or miss. I've seen mostly HBS and Stanford guys at the global shops. Booth is known, but not to the same degree as HBS/Stanford. In the U.S., Wharton has the most alumni and I'm pretty confident the best on-campus PE recruiting. Booth dominates Chicago PE (alongside Kellogg) but also has a presence in markets such as San Francisco, Texas, and individuals spread less densely throughout other cities. Wharton is everywhere. I have seen incredibly few CBS grads in PE -- but I'm not focused on New York. My suspicion, unconfirmed, is that CBS is strong in NYC PE but very weak elsewhere -- probably due to self-selection.

CompBanker

  • 5
Nov 21, 2014 - 9:05am

@CompBanker, thanks for your opinions on these. I especially appreciate the point of view from a Booth alumn doing PE - which I haven't seen many. I just have the feeling that Booth does not really offer that many resources in PE as CBS does both on curriculum, and activities - which is normally where you would start connecting with people and building some hands on experience. In terms of classes I've only seen one class focused on PE and I'm not certain there is even a PE club at Booth. I know they have a couple of competitions which they mentioned but it just gives the overall impression that there are far from offering students more resources in this field. On the other hand, I think PE is pretty emphasized at CBS they have a very good PE conference, 5-6 courses especially dedicated to PE which you take with people with experience in the industry (John Moon, for instance), the Deal Camp, The PE Club so it just gives the feeling that they'll provide more resources since many students are much more engaged in the industry - in terms of network too.

I'd like to kindly ask a follow up question on Booth's PE presence, how many students were doing/recruiting for PE in your class - I know this is a different type of recruitment process but still I've talked with numerous Booth grads both on campus and off-campus with friends studying there and I haven't met a single person wanting to do PE. Of course, your opinion matters most since you study there! Thanks a lot, I appreciate your insight here

Nov 21, 2014 - 9:41am

jlgdr1987:

@CompBanker, thanks for your opinions on these. I especially appreciate the point of view from a Booth alumn doing PE - which I haven't seen many. I just have the feeling that Booth does not really offer that many resources in PE as CBS does both on curriculum, and activities - which is normally where you would start connecting with people and building some hands on experience. In terms of classes I've only seen one class focused on PE and I'm not certain there is even a PE club at Booth. I know they have a couple of competitions which they mentioned but it just gives the overall impression that there are far from offering students more resources in this field. On the other hand, I think PE is pretty emphasized at CBS they have a very good PE conference, 5-6 courses especially dedicated to PE which you take with people with experience in the industry (John Moon, for instance), the Deal Camp, The PE Club so it just gives the feeling that they'll provide more resources since many students are much more engaged in the industry - in terms of network too.

I'd like to kindly ask a follow up question on Booth's PE presence, how many students were doing/recruiting for PE in your class - I know this is a different type of recruitment process but still I've talked with numerous Booth grads both on campus and off-campus with friends studying there and I haven't met a single person wanting to do PE. Of course, your opinion matters most since you study there! Thanks a lot, I appreciate your insight here


jlgdr1987, based on your comment I think you really need to educate yourself better on Booth's PE offerings. I don't mean that in a bad way, just saying that your information is very incomplete. Booth has a general PE club, which is active and also organizes a PE conference. Here is the link: http://student.chicagobooth.edu/group/pe/ In addition, there is even a Latin America focused PE group (I believe it is unofficial) that helps students connect regarding PE in LatAm.

Beyond the challenges you mentioned, Booth offers a PE lab which matches students with PE shops in Chicago to work for a quarter. These PE lab opportunities tend to go to students with no PE experience, and in many cases no banking experience. Some of them end up becoming summer internships and some full-time jobs. Now they aren't matching you with funds such as Madison Dearborn, more lower middle market funds. It is a great avenue for people to break into the industry that would otherwise not exist.

As for classes. Booth provides a lot of support to the students recruiting for banking, but they are also incredibly valuable for people going into PE. Courses focused on M&A accounting, heavy heavy financial modeling, and of course heavily subsidized Training the Street classes taught on campus. These courses obviously focus more on technical skills. But lets be honest with ourselves -- one course at Booth (I'm assuming it is the same at other schools) equates to 30 contact hours. Add on homework and you're looking at one course equating to (in hours) about a week of experience. Even if 50% of your classes were directly relevant to PE it would still be a paltry amount of experience compared to working in the industry. The point is: comparing schools based on PE-related course offering, or even expecting that PE coursework will give you a leg up on recruiting, is highly unlikely. Add on top of this the fact that most people will be done with recruiting by the time they can start taking the relevant electives...

While I am certainly proud of Booth and think the school is great, I think you're making a mistake comparing schools based on course offerings if your goal is to get a job rather than just learn for learning's sake.

CompBanker

  • 3
  • 1
Nov 21, 2014 - 10:51am

Booth or Wharton. Philly is so close to NYC it is negligible. Also, I'd give Philly a little more time. A lot of see and do in the city. I think Chicago and NYC are better cities, but I seriously doubt someone is going to get bored with Philly in two years. Especially a B school student who is traveling and do other stuff. COL is great, close DC, Boston and NYC.

Personally, I'd do Wharton, but if you are OK with Chicago, booth all the way. Amazing city, booth network is great. Tons of alumni in all fields. I'd definitely redo your sear have for PE Booth alumni. My old job interacted with a lot of Chicago sponsors and we saw endless Booth alumni.

  • 3
  • 1
Nov 21, 2014 - 10:58am

@TNA Thanks for your comments! Would like to know what is your perception on Booth vs CBS in terms of IB / PE recruitment. More probably on the PE side unless you have any opinion that differs in regards to both schools being good enough and negligible difference from IB which other persons have pointed out before!

Thanks a lot!
Cheers
J :)

P.S Are you an alumni Booth or Wharton?

Nov 21, 2014 - 11:05am

I didn't attend either, although I have worked with and am friends with people who attended all three.

IMO, CBS is the weakest of the three. It's still a great school and will get you where you want, but I think Wharton and Booth have a better rep and alumni reach. As far as PE goes, booth is king in Chicago. Lot of MM/lower MM sponsors were Chicago guys. I'd say if you are cool with Chicago PE then I'd pick Booth. I'm sure it will place all over, but when I'd see decks from East coast sponsors it was more a Wharton, CBS, Harvard, etc group of people.

Just one data point though. You're going to do well whatever you choose. Congrats.

  • 2
  • 1
Nov 21, 2014 - 11:59am

Yup. IMO, there is very strong evidence that CBS is the weakest of the 3. I have talked to a ton of people in banking, S&T, HF, and AM, almost all of them think Booth is better than CBS. The only real exceptions were those who work in NYC based long-short equity hedge funds.

Nov 21, 2014 - 1:33pm

Lol yeah. How hard can it be to get into the 2 most prestigious business schools in the world that every accomplished young professional fantasizes about getting into and spend their entire life from college onwards to get in?

Nov 21, 2014 - 1:38pm

WSO on the whole is really anti CBS.

I worked at a GS/MS IB and am returning full-time. There were 6 CBS students, 1 Booth.

For PE, CBS is stronger because Booth, while a great school, is a new comer. Prior to the big donation and name change to Booth they weren't a top competitor, whereas CBS was (albeit has fallen since). Point is older alumns are in top positions at shops -- over time this may change though.

Also, Uris does suck, but I believe it is something like 2 years until we get a brand new building for just the b-school.

"They are all former investment bankers that were laid off in the economic collapse that Nancy Pelosi caused. They have no marketable skills, but by God they work hard."
  • 2
Nov 21, 2014 - 1:47pm

Thanks! Follow up question for you, do you think the recruitment stats for top positions in IBD are biased because of the so many strong candidates that are looking to come to IBD after school that have lived in NYC most of their lives that only wanted to attend CBS over any top school because of the location? This may seem as your are competing with extremely well qualified candidates (many even associates pre-mba) that are going to take part of the jobs anyway. I had this perception but dunno how true it is. I think this doesn't happen to often with Wharton or Booth.

Nov 21, 2014 - 3:21pm

I don't really see that. Tbh the vast majority of people doing IB after b-school weren't bankers before, and between the schools you are mentioning it shouldn't be that hard to get an IB job. In regards to IB recruiting at CBS last year there were about 80 people recruiting for IB and of those maybe 2 or 3 were bankers before, and all at smaller regional boutique type shops.

"They are all former investment bankers that were laid off in the economic collapse that Nancy Pelosi caused. They have no marketable skills, but by God they work hard."
  • 1
Nov 21, 2014 - 1:46pm

I am a student at CBS. I am happy to give you my impressions privately, because I don't think these conversations on these forums are valuable. The majority of these people giving opinions are either preMBA or want to boost their program and find that forums provide the biggest megaphone to do so.

I can also give you actual facts and correct some statements on placement in IBD and PE if you want to talk privately e.g. mbavsmfin's point on banking placement is just wrong. Nearly everyone from CBS who wanted a banking job is going to a top tier BB. I am looking at actual data. PM me if you want to chat.

Nov 21, 2014 - 1:58pm

I don't think that is the case. Nearly 100% of the people recruiting for banking did not do banking pre-MBA. I would not use probability of getting a banking offer as a significant school selection criteria, because I think you will have an extremely strong chance from any school in the top 10.

Nov 21, 2014 - 2:05pm

Great! It was just a suspicion on my side. Yeah I know but still one can tell differences on the BB IBD placement of schools CBS vs. Booth and even less ranked schools. Checking the employment reports you can tell where everyone is going to work and there are some things that catch your eye :)

I agree with you nevertheless that IBD recruitment will be pretty strong for both Booth and CBS, so the argument probably comes more around the PE advantage that each school may offer here.

Thanks!!

Best Response
Nov 21, 2014 - 2:31pm

Wow, a healthy dose of Columbia bashing here. As aforementioned, posts on any anonymous online forum can be driven by irrational / impassioned / misinformed authors.

Disclaimer: I currently attend Columbia. I was also admitted to Wharton. I did not apply to Chicago. All three schools are great.

1) Investment Banking Placement: Zero difference on whether you attend Wharton, Columbia, Chicago. As previously stated ad nauseam, investment banking is not as popular amongst top MBA students these days. MBA students generally adopt a "follow the herd" mentality, and investment banking provided abnormally high bonuses pre-2007, and consequently drew applicants in large droves. Obviously post-2007/08 crisis, investment banking isn't nearly as lucrative and numerous MBA students (but not all) have supplemented their interests with tech / consulting / investment management opportunities.

What does this mean for an incoming first year? The competition isn't nearly as bad anymore for landing a job at a Bulge Bracket or an elite boutique firm. Obviously it will be more difficult to obtain a job at GS / MS vs. CS / DB / Citi / Barclays (I used to work at Citi), but to obtain a BB / elite boutique position is extremely doable if you have the passion to do so.

Also, to clarify a misconception, banking recruiting isn't necessarily more stressful / difficult because Columbia is in the city (i.e. do CBS students have to do more coffee chats, etc.) Investment banking is super high-touch throughout the recruiting season and it's analogous at any school.

You can get your dream banking job at either Columbia / Wharton / Chicago. One example: Evercore only actively recruits at Columbia, Harvard, Northwestern, Chicago and Wharton.

2) On-campus buy-side recruiting at Columbia: It is not dead. I don't know why a previous poster argues as such. I am a 1st-year interested in investment management and here are just a small handful of firms recruiting for summer internships (i.e. I will apply to these positions through Columbia's campus-recruiting site): DE Shaw, Fidelity, Clearbridge, T Rowe Price, PIMCO, Causeway, MFS, Citadel, Eaton Vance, Capital Group, Baron Capital, Wellington, Appaloosa, Elliott, Orbis, Davidson Kempner, Dimensional

In other words, most major mutual funds and many hedge funds recruit at Columbia.

One may use the argument, "well how many CBS students were hired at these firms?" and the reality is that the number is subject to change year-over-year. Why? Recruiting at any major mutual fund / hedge fund is school-agnostic. For example, Eaton Vance is looking to hire 2-3 MBA interns max across the country this year. They only recruit (according to an on campus info session) at HBS, Wharton and Columbia. They don't care if all 3 interns are from HBS, or all 3 are from Wharton, or all 3 are from Columbia. They just take the 3 best candidates, regardless of the school. Eaton Vance hired predominantly Harvard students last year. On the other hand, Fidelity (another top mutual fund choice) hired more Columbia students than Harvard students last year.

The conclusion: buyside recruiting for public equities is extremely competitive at any school and you just want to be at a school that at least gives you an opportunity to interview with the top firms. Only 5-6 schools allow you to do so and this subset includes all three (Columbia / Wharton / Chicago).

3) Private equity: can't speak to Private Equity in great detail (am not recruiting for it) but I would just point to a recent poetsandquants article as a data point.

"Where Top MBAs Work In Private Equity"

Go to page two that lists out alumni at mega-fund PE shops.

Harvard / Wharton are at the top. Stanford/Columbia/NYU (probably due to their location in NYC and undergrad alumni base as well) are pretty comparable (certain schools have greater presence at certain firms). There is a drop-off to Chicago.

If you are interested in Private Equity, I would go to Wharton over Columbia and Chicago.

That being said, I have classmates that worked at Warburg Pincus pre-CBS and my best friend from Citi obtained a PE internship from Booth. It's going to be doable at any of the 3, I just think Wharton has a greater presence in PE. My humble opinion.

4) Campus: Columbia raised the most money for any Ivy-league school in its most recent fundraising campaign ($6.1bn, closed in 2014; just google Columbia ivy league fundraising). A new $600 million Business School campus ($100mm from Kravis; $100mm from Perelman, a Wharton alumnus) is going to be built within the next 2-3 years.

TLDR: Chicago / Columbia / Wharton, doesn't matter for sell-side Investment Banking. Columbia places great in investment management at mutual funds and hedge funds. Go to Wharton if you want to work in private equity. All three schools are great and you will be extremely happy at any of the three.

Nov 21, 2014 - 2:43pm

Awesome post!! Thanks so much, I couldn't agree more with what you said. Except for 2. which I'm not really too informed about which seems to be your area of interest but great for sharing with other posters who had different opinions on the industry. Its interesting what you mentioned about Evercore - I'm particullarly surprised to know they recruit at Kellogg (Not particullarly known as a finance school at all, but probably because of the proximity with Booth I supposse- but maybe MIT could have been the same case, well anyways just curiosity here.

Also, If you don't mind is your friend at Booth intering in a mega-fund PE fund? I also saw the article of Poets and Quants and found it very interesting. It didn't changed my perspective that much in terms of PE for CBS and Booth to be frank because I had checked myself the roster of most top megafunds and saw more CBS people than Booth students generally, although this is a rather rudimentary method of informing oneself about the industry.

I'm also looking forward to the new campus, as someone else mentioned before, I think its going to have a massive impact in the school's perception. Physical infrastructure is definitely one cons of CBS, there's no doubt about that. But hopefully, its better to spend time outside the school attending events or meeting other people in activities off campus

Appreciate your excellent thoughts on these schools, have a great one!

Nov 22, 2014 - 5:21pm

Hard to pick up chicks when you're poor and subletting a closet

“Elections are a futures market for stolen property”
Nov 22, 2014 - 8:44pm

So apparently there seems to be consensus mostly in three things here:

1) Recruitment for IBD - Both are strong programs and will get you any offer at BB IBD or boutiques - Evercore that only recuit in both of these top programs apart from other selected ones. But in general terms, no apparent difference in this end

2) Differences about both programs: CBS and Booth in other aspects different to recruitment are rather personal / subjective metrics. Where to live / Cost of living, Community, Financial Aid, Academics - style of teaching (I get the feeling that Booth is more academic - CBS more hands-on given large number of adjunct professors), Fit with people etc. etc.

3) In terms of PE recruitment, there's seems to be consensus that although both school trail Wharton in this industry CBS has traditionally been stronger in PE, outside the Midwest area in which Booth apparently has an edge. Internationally, CBS seems to have a slight advantage over Booth for PE. In other aspects, it seems that both programs offer numerous opportunities in the industry in terms of hands-on education, clubs, labs, competitions, conferences, recruitment. Booth has very nice offerings in this sense (labs) that are very hands-on, I believe that CBS is more of a combination between courses and some of these hands on opportunities together with the possibility of also work during the semester at a PE shop.

Nov 22, 2014 - 8:46pm

I believe that CBS slight edge on PE lies mainly on the network which is stronger in the industry both in many places around the US as abroad. I expect that Booth will continue to build a stronger network in the industry in the years to come but I think that this will take a couple of years down the line

Nov 22, 2014 - 11:17pm

People in this thread are over-estimating Columbia and PE. Check out the below:

http://poetsandquants.com/2014/11/22/wall-streets-stunning-collapse-at-…

Money Quote: "PE, buyout and venture capital jobs fell to just 2.4% of the latest class, down from 3.2% a year ago and 5.3% in 2008"

Booth on the other hand has 5% PE and 3% VC:

http://www.chicagobooth.edu/employmentreport/docs/2013-2014-Employment-…

There may have been a time when Columbia had an edge, but those days are long over.

Nov 23, 2014 - 2:14am

mbavsmfin:

CBS has been in the midst of a precipitous decline. That P&Q article only confirm what we already know. Financial firms have realized that CBS is terribly overrated and prefer Booth students.

It's pretty shocking, even Kellogg sends twice as many people to PE as Columbia:

http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/career_employer/employment_statisti…

Nov 23, 2014 - 5:24am

Your NW love and Columbia hate is getting a bit out of hand, so I thought I'd check your figures - and you're wrong/spreading misinformation again. Yes, % may have fallen, but (using class of 2016 numbers as proxy, admittedly):

Columbia - PE/VC etc jobs are 2.4% of a class of 743 = 18 people (rounded)

NW - "Investment management" is 3% of a class of 483 = 14 people (rounded)

You are clearly spreading misinformation in saying Kellogg sends twice as many people to PE as Columbia...correct me if I'm wrong.

I have no dog in this fight and personally think I'd rather go to Booth than Columbia if deciding between both for my MBA in a few years (if adding an opinion to this thread)....but WSO has enough misinformation as it is without you spreading any more.

Nov 23, 2014 - 12:17pm

notthehospitalER:

Your NW love and Columbia hate is getting a bit out of hand, so I thought I'd check your figures - and you're wrong/spreading misinformation again. Yes, % may have fallen, but (using class of 2016 numbers as proxy, admittedly):

Columbia - PE/VC etc jobs are 2.4% of a class of 743 = 18 people (rounded)

NW - "Investment management" is 3% of a class of 483 = 14 people (rounded)

You are clearly spreading misinformation in saying Kellogg sends twice as many people to PE as Columbia...correct me if I'm wrong.

I have no dog in this fight and personally think I'd rather go to Booth than Columbia if deciding between both for my MBA in a few years (if adding an opinion to this thread)....but WSO has enough misinformation as it is without you spreading any more.

We have PE category on our employment report, it's 5.2% on the report. It's an line item inches away from the VC and IM figure.

Nov 23, 2014 - 10:07am

But remember that CBS class is double the size of Booth, so in theory CBS sends more people to PE than Booth does. And I am clearly referring that CBS edge is due to the network built in past years, I could agree that Booth is becoming more active in the industry but it is still years until they match CBS in this sense. If we also refer to the P & Q article we can see the large difference in placement on top mega funds.

Nov 23, 2014 - 10:46am

Can I just ask a question. If PE placements post MBA are largely dictated by being banking/PE pre MBA, then what does it matter how analytical the finance classes are? And I'm sure you can take or not take as analytical a class you want at booth or Columbia. Just opt to take higher level classes.

IMO, you don't need to be that analytical in finance if you have direct finance experience.

  • 1
Nov 23, 2014 - 11:09am

CBS 12' Booth 12' CBS 13' Booth 13' CBS 14' Booth 14'
Goldman Sachs15 9 16 7 7
Morgan Stanley11 12 8 10 5
JP Morgan15 7 10 9 9
Credit Suisse13 14 9 13 12
Merril Lynch 12 14 11 0 8
UBS7 6 3 0 0
Citi8 7 13 9 9
Barclays3 5 7 0 4
Deutsche Bank10 7 0 5 4
Lazard0 0 0 0 0
Evercore0 0 7 0 0
Greenhill0 0 0 0 0
Moelis0 0 3 0 0

Total 94 81 87 53 58

Total Class 750 604 744 601 607
% IB15% 14% 14% 13% 15%

PE4.3% 7.1% 3.2% 4.9% 2.4% 5.1%
# of students 32 40 23 23 17 25

Nov 23, 2014 - 11:14am

I guess the question is how to distinguish which school is stronger with these figures. It seems Booth has been faring better in terms of PE placements as % of class in the last two years. CBS went from 4% to 3% to 2% while Booth went from 7% to 5% to 5%. I guess it did fare more steadily. On the banking side, both were pretty tied and stable. CBS went from 15% to 13% while Booth went from 14% to 13%. I'm not sure if I'm reading this the right way but I guess its better to attend a school that has a large % of people going into banking that attend a school that has 2% going into banking just because there will be more resources, albeit great competition as well but if we see it in relative terms the latter point doesn't really matter that much. On PE, the number of students at Booth 40, 23 and 25 is greater than for CBS, 32, 23, 17. I wonder though if most of the funds that Booth people are working after are in the Midwest area.

Nov 23, 2014 - 11:28am

I just want to highlight that although % are roughly equal, I think that it is an advantage that CBS class is bigger than Booth because in absolute terms it sends much more students to Wall Street which is favorable in terms of connections, network with these people. Although, this depends on how 'tight knit' is Booth student body whether they'll be more likely to help out because they are a smaller class but again we kinda fall into a subjective space for this.

Nov 23, 2014 - 4:09pm

I've just been around long enough to see about 10 posts just like this.

  • 1
Nov 23, 2014 - 7:35pm

Disclaimer: I am a 1st year CF Analyst looking to get into a Top10 Business School in the near future. Being close to NYC, I had a chance to visit CBS.

My impressions were not good - so let me pile on:

1.) Facilities were terrible. We all know that they are building new facilities, but it doesn't leave a visitor with a good impression/
2.) J Termers: As it has been previously stated in this thread, J Termers are people (mostly foreigners) who have a guaranteed job at the end. They spoil the whole atmosphere because they are not looking for a job or any sort of development. I chatted with a few of them, and they could barely speak English
3.) When I visited, I was not impressed by the tour guides. I could easily see that they did not have much pride in being at CBS. The Hermes society is supposed to have people who are passionate about CBS?
4.) Brady is absolutely right when he talks about how expensive NYC is. You won't be living in Queens when you attend CBS - or will you be?
5.) ED is a easy way to student of lower caliber to get it. Combine that with the J Termers.
6.) If you are still not convinced, just look at the LinkedIn profile of CBS MBA students. You will not be impressed by most of them.

Nov 23, 2014 - 7:51pm

snakeoil:

Disclaimer: I am a 1st year CF Analyst looking to get into a Top10 Business School in the near future. Being close to NYC, I had a chance to visit CBS.

My impressions were not good - so let me pile on:

1.) Facilities were terrible. We all know that they are building new facilities, but it doesn't leave a visitor with a good impression/

2.) J Termers: As it has been previously stated in this thread, J Termers are people (mostly foreigners) who have a guaranteed job at the end. They spoil the whole atmosphere because they are not looking for a job or any sort of development. I chatted with a few of them, and they could barely speak English

3.) When I visited, I was not impressed by the tour guides. I could easily see that they did not have much pride in being at CBS. The Hermes society is supposed to have people who are passionate about CBS?

4.) Brady is absolutely right when he talks about how expensive NYC is. You won't be living in Queens when you attend CBS - or will you be?

5.) ED is a easy way to student of lower caliber to get it. Combine that with the J Termers.

6.) If you are still not convinced, just look at the LinkedIn profile of CBS MBA students. You will not be impressed by most of them.

I've too visited CBS twice and done due diligence on the school so I can chime in.

1) I agree
2) You are somewhat true about J-termers but who cares about them? They will be in a different cluster, you won't be taking classes with them and you won't be involved in the large number of professional clubs with them. Think of this ias having people in a part time program or an executive program just as any other school (Eg. Booth)
3) That can be true, but I can say that I talked with a couple of CBS students from Hermes society and they were quite excited about the school. It depends but I wouldn't use this to judge my decision to go to school at all
4) I agree
5) I don't agree with this statement. Why do you say its an easy way? Check the GMAT club page if you want to see how many people get rejected in ED. I've already mentioned reasons in my previous post of why students apply to J-term and being an easy way in is definitely not one of them. Totally disagree with this statement.
6) This is outright ridicolous. Check the Linkedin page of HBS and Stanford students and tell me if they are all GS /KKR, there are a bunch of unimpressive people in these programs too just as in any MBA program worldwide. You just need to deal with the fact that you'll encounter unempressive people everywhere in your life and b-school is no exception.

By the way, what's a CF analyst?

Nov 23, 2014 - 7:55pm

Dude, why are you fighting the opinions people have? That's how they feel about CBS and you're likely not going to change that....if you like CBS, apply and if you get in go there if you want. If you prefer Booth, go there if you can and if you get in to Wharton, go there. You don't have to convince anyone that CBS is right or wrong for you.

Nov 23, 2014 - 7:57pm

You are wrong on #2. The J-termers do take the first-year core classes with each other, during the spring and summer terms of their first year. However, beginning in the fall, they take electives with everyone else. Student clubs are also open to everyone, so there actually is a lot of interaction between J-termers and August entry.

Living in NYC as a student, unless you have a ton of money saved up, makes very little sense. It's a pretty awful existence.

Nov 24, 2014 - 10:42am

This conversation is insane. You can't use these stats to determine your personal odds. Your success in getting a PE job is going to be highly contingent on your personal work experience and abilities. The difference between the two schools is negligible compared to the importance of your work experience. Booth could easily raise it's PE numbers -- just accept more people with PE experience. That's not how these schools work. They try to build a balanced class. The reason Booth IBD numbers are falling is because the field is not as attractive to students as entrepreneurship and tech these days -- it isn't because Booth isn't placing as well. And IBD isn't even that competitive, most of my friends received about 3 offers on average.

jlgdr1987, you're highly over-analyzing the situation. Figure out which one is the better "fit" for you and go there.

CompBanker

  • 3
Nov 24, 2014 - 10:50am

CompBanker:

This conversation is insane. You can't use these stats to determine your personal odds. Your success in getting a PE job is going to be highly contingent on your personal work experience and abilities. The difference between the two schools is negligible compared to the importance of your work experience. Booth could easily raise it's PE numbers -- just accept more people with PE experience. That's not how these schools work. They try to build a balanced class. The reason Booth IBD numbers are falling is because the field is not as attractive to students as entrepreneurship and tech these days -- it isn't because Booth isn't placing as well. And IBD isn't even that competitive, most of my friends received about 3 offers on average.

jlgdr1987, you're highly over-analyzing the situation. Figure out which one is the better "fit" for you and go there.

@compbanker. Thanks I agree I'm probably overanalyzing. Was just curious about the story behind the data. But I know that ultimately I'll have to trust my gut.

Thanks!

Nov 24, 2014 - 11:48am

This thread confirms to me that Booth students have an inferiority complex and are definitely trying to overcompensate for something.

"They are all former investment bankers that were laid off in the economic collapse that Nancy Pelosi caused. They have no marketable skills, but by God they work hard."
  • 1
Nov 24, 2014 - 4:44pm

CountryUnderdog:

This thread confirms to me that Booth students have an inferiority complex and are definitely trying to overcompensate for something.

The people bashing CBS in this thread do not attend Booth. Not me, not Brady, not Opsdude.

On the other hand, the only way to solve a CBS students' inferiority complex is to place them next to a Stern student.

Nov 24, 2014 - 11:49am

I'm willing to put money on a kid that went GS/MS/Evr/Moelis -> Carlyle/TPG/KKR/Apollo could go to any one of these MBAs and come out with his choice of a BB or go back into PE.

Once you are at this level in terms of school your background and experience is all that matters. Its like stupid arguments over GS FIG vs MS M&A. Its self-selecting and its a person by person basis. If there is honestly a fund out there that will tell a kid "No you can't come back after your MBA because you chose Columbia instead of Wharton" then is that really somewhere you would want to work anyways??

Nov 24, 2014 - 1:56pm

DaBBzMan:

I'm willing to put money on a kid that went GS/MS/Evr/Moelis -> Carlyle/TPG/KKR/Apollo could go to any one of these MBAs and come out with his choice of a BB or go back into PE.

Once you are at this level in terms of school your background and experience is all that matters. Its like stupid arguments over GS FIG vs MS M&A. Its self-selecting and its a person by person basis. If there is honestly a fund out there that will tell a kid "No you can't come back after your MBA because you chose Columbia instead of Wharton" then is that really somewhere you would want to work anyways??

However, I'd like to disagree because PE funds are very picky so some will only hire people from HBS, some will only hire people from Wharton etc.. I guess not too many, but they often do this. Of course, if a strong candidate from CBS comes they are not going to reject him but they are somewhat biased already to what type of person they want and coming out of which MBA preferably

Nov 24, 2014 - 12:58pm

Lots of interesting points here, but let me give you my 2 cents, coming from a relevant background (Top-tier fund - think BX/TPG/KKR/APO and similarly applying to bschool, although I will be targeting more public market investing coming out.

For PE, its H/S......W...............C.....B. Period.

Breaking into PE is tough for anyone, but HS kids do it pretty regularly. Wharton has its share of success (but alot of guys that go into PE came from PE, so they're just going back). Columbia/Booth is way below those three. Seriously, ignore anyone that says "I have friends that did it!" - these are kids that came from PE or are exceptional in networking/connections, etc. It's really hard.

With that said, I place Columbia above Booth because of the location. Booth may dominate Chicago PE but honestly, if you want to get the best starting job for PE for your career, you gotta go with NYC. Although PE guys/recruiters won't be super wowed by Columbia, at least you have a fighting chance to convince someone through effective networking. Doing that from Chicago is harder.

So I see it this way - HS = fighting chance for PE, W = uphill struggle for PE, C = hustle like crazy for PE and it may be possible, B = investment banking.

And for what its worth, here's an anecdote from my end (yeah yeah, I said anecdotes are useless but whatever). My friends at top funds simply don't apply to Booth. They are all HSW first round, and Columbia somewhere along that timeframe given its rolling admissions. All of them recognize that HSW is significantly above the others in PE recruiting (with HS even more so), but at least Columbia might give them a chance to explore another very lucrative career in public markets investing (ie Value Investing Program and HFs scattered around NYC and Greenwich) and/or network their way into something. Below those four, they simply don't bother. One actually applied HWC, got into all three, and then went to Columbia because he simply wanted to land the highest paying HF job possible after his MBA.

Feel free to ask me any questions. Obviously I'm biased in my own way, but this is what I honestly observed in my time. And full disclosure, I am applying to HSWC.

Nov 24, 2014 - 1:07pm

Oh and all that talk about rankings, and Booth moving up, its probably true that Booth moved up a lot in reputation recently, but its a pretty laughable notion that it is set to displace Wharton. Rankings are like Mr. Market. They move around often and sometimes things are quoted at prices that don't make sense. But long-held reputations are like intrinsic value. They are more stable. It will be a very long time before investment professionals and the finance profession sees Booth surpassing any of the HSW. And, being Asian, it will similarly be a long time before a school like Booth surpasses the Ivies in reputation. Reputation isn't everything, but it is something, given how much of the recruiting/career progression in the investment world is done through connections/networking/reputation.

Nov 24, 2014 - 1:38pm

Actually, MBA rankings are quite volatile because depending on the state of the economy and which sectors are on the rise and fall, the "intrinsic" value of these schools will be in flux. I don't want this to devolve into a rankings debate, but whereas HYPSM has pretty much always been the best colleges, the same cannot be said for MBA. Believe it or not, in the late 80's and early 90's Wharton consistently beat out HBS in rankings, and top finance people actually preferred Wharton. And Stanford was certainly not considered on par with HBS back then.

You also place way too much premium on the Ivy brand. In MBA world it matters very little. As I said earlier, would anyone turn down Booth for Yale SOM because the latter is Ivy? In the words of Chris Carter, "Come on maannnn!"

Dec 30, 2014 - 12:16am

mbavsmfin:

Actually, MBA rankings are quite volatile because depending on the state of the economy and which sectors are on the rise and fall, the "intrinsic" value of these schools will be in flux. I don't want this to devolve into a rankings debate, but whereas HYPSM has pretty much always been the best colleges, the same cannot be said for MBA. Believe it or not, in the late 80's and early 90's Wharton consistently beat out HBS in rankings, and top finance people actually preferred Wharton. And Stanford was certainly not considered on par with HBS back then.

You also place way too much premium on the Ivy brand. In MBA world it matters very little. As I said earlier, would anyone turn down Booth for Yale SOM because the latter is Ivy? In the words of Chris Carter, "Come on maannnn!"

Interesting that you say Wharton consistently beat out HBS in rankings in the late 80s and early 90s. I looked for a source of historical MBA rankings and all I was able to find was this:
http://www.mba50.com/a-history-of-the-us-news-mba-ranking-1990-2013/

Seems like US News at least has consistently put HBS over Wharton. Not saying you're wrong, but I was wondering if you had the source on hand showing Wharton beating HBS in the rankings in the late 80s and early 90s just for my future reference...

EDIT: I did see this chart showing Wharton beating out HBS in the 2000s: http://www.mba50.com/fifteen-years-of-influence-the-ft-mba-ranking-1999… - was this perhaps what you were referring to?

Nov 24, 2014 - 2:01pm

ProfessorOAK:

Oh and all that talk about rankings, and Booth moving up, its probably true that Booth moved up a lot in reputation recently, but its a pretty laughable notion that it is set to displace Wharton. Rankings are like Mr. Market. They move around often and sometimes things are quoted at prices that don't make sense. But long-held reputations are like intrinsic value. They are more stable. It will be a very long time before investment professionals and the finance profession sees Booth surpassing any of the HSW. And, being Asian, it will similarly be a long time before a school like Booth surpasses the Ivies in reputation. Reputation isn't everything, but it is something, given how much of the recruiting/career progression in the investment world is done through connections/networking/reputation.

RESPECT for Professor Oak!!!

Nov 24, 2014 - 1:09pm

Yea mbavsfin is borderline slandering CBS. I can agree that it probably takes a special kind of extrovert to get the most out of CBS's social scene, but as far as academics / exit opps go, he's making them sound way worse than the other schools. Whether or not the school is going through a slump, the CBS brand name is still great and clearly a new facility will help alleviate some of the issues with cohesiveness. I will definitely consider going there in a few years.

Nov 24, 2014 - 1:43pm

Not sure what the weird dynamics are with different users' histories, but just wanted to supply my two cents. I see a lot things floating around about the decline of Columbia and Wharton, but in my view, this simply has not been true. I firmly believe Booth has deserved its meteoric rise in perception. However, for where it matters (and for me and a lot of others I suspect), HSWC still stand a bit apart. HS for their undeniable prestige factor. W for its history, alumni, and again, undeniable prestige factor. C for its location and heritage in investing. Aspiring to go into PE or fundamental HFs pretty much should rule out a belief in EMT, and Booth has been at the forefront of advancing EMT. No bueno.

Again, if the goal is to go into IB, consulting, other finance, I really believe all top schools will prepare you well. But if its PE/HF you're after, then my top four are HSWC. After that, its still possible, but much harder. At each school in my top 4, you'll still have to network thoughtfully and go beyond the coursework (seriously guys, listing available courses is moot. Nobody cares. For HFs, show me a stock idea and any investments you have made in your PA or elsewhere. For PE, show me you can handle the modeling/diligence/deal structuring ability - these all come from outside of normal classwork, except for Columbia, where some courses literally are about developing stock pitches).

Nov 24, 2014 - 1:49pm

Countering Ivy prestige with Booth vs Yale is a bit misleading, but then again, I may have started it by making a blanket statement. I apologize. Sure, Booth vs. Yale should be a no-brainer depending on what you're after, but I guess what I meant by "Ivies" were specifically H,W,C as Dartmouth and Yale seem to be a bit farther off in peoples' minds, particularly for finance.

Again (broken record) I would caution everyone interested in MBA to break into PE/HF that networking is CRITICAL. I myself broke into my current position mainly through networking and convincing people that I could offer more value than others in probably more prestigious backgrounds. With that said, networking has to be thoughtful and prepared. Mass sending of emails "Hello X, can you please talk to me, I'm a student..." is always recognized and ignored. But send me an email with an attachment of your recent stock idea for Value Investors Club? Damn, I'd actually really like to talk to you!

Nov 24, 2014 - 3:55pm

State of Trance:

Wharton if you like to work internationally in PE which is what I believe you are intending on doing in the near future.

Thanks! Internationally meaning US and Latin America most probably.

Nov 24, 2014 - 6:47pm

NYC is a lot more expensive than Chicago, no questioning that. However say the extreme case is true, where your time in NYC is 50% more expensive than Chicago. So say 300k vs. 200k. If that 100k difference gets you your dream job (which let's face it, probably has a higher chance of being in NYC than in Chicago if you are targeting PE, and again everyone, you probably want to network well and a lot for PE), which in turn continues to work for you throughout your career through better motivation, performance, better connections, etc... then that 100k suddenly doesn't look so daunting. An MBA after all is not about immediate post-grad salaries vs. cost of living vs. other short term things like that. The numbers, when you take into account foregone income, NEVER make sense unless you are making assumptions about the long-term. And long-term, the 100k (honestly, I think the difference will be far less than this) simply does not matter.

Nov 24, 2014 - 6:56pm

ProfessorOAK:

NYC is a lot more expensive than Chicago, no questioning that. However say the extreme case is true, where your time in NYC is 50% more expensive than Chicago. So say 300k vs. 200k. If that 100k difference gets you your dream job (which let's face it, probably has a higher chance of being in NYC than in Chicago if you are targeting PE, and again everyone, you probably want to network well and a lot for PE), which in turn continues to work for you throughout your career through better motivation, performance, better connections, etc... then that 100k suddenly doesn't look so daunting. An MBA after all is not about immediate post-grad salaries vs. cost of living vs. other short term things like that. The numbers, when you take into account foregone income, NEVER make sense unless you are making assumptions about the long-term. And long-term, the 100k (honestly, I think the difference will be far less than this) simply does not matter.

I agree with Oak here but I think 300k is just outright exaggerated I believe you did this on purpose cause although its long term and I believe the value it has, it really looks daunting!

Nov 24, 2014 - 7:40pm

Let's assume that if the OP goes to CBS, he lands in NYC PE, but if he goes to Booth he lands in Chicago PE (big assumption here but let's go with it). Does NYC PE pay more than Chicago once you adjust for taxes and cost of living? More importantly, will NYC PE really result in a significantly higher long-term payout? Of course if one were to work at a megafund such as BX/KKR/tpg/carlyle/ceberus/warburg, the answer is obvious, but I think we can safely assume that students at booth/cbs are not getting those jobs. For the sake of argument, let's assume that it's a MM PE shop in NYC vs MM in Chicago.

Nov 24, 2014 - 7:58pm

I can't imagine there would be a significant difference in immediate post-MBA comp, although I wouldn't be surprised if NYC is a bit higher due to cost of living (which like you pointed out, gets canceled out easily). But longer-term, here are the reasons why I think NYC has a definite advantage:

1. It's a numbers game. Supply of PE positions ">PE positions. NYC has more supply. I agree to get out of the mentality of thinking only about the megafunds. Smaller MM PE shops exist in both NYC and Chicago, but again, NYC has more. Not only more, but successful buyside recruiting is about getting facetime and convincing people that you, out of the dozens competing for your position, are best equipped to handle the job. This can be done through direct meetings and 2nd degree / 3rd degree connections/referrals. If you are up for it (and this is a big if), I think you can build up a more robust RELEVANT network in NYC by going to CBS than in booth.
2. Deals. Like in banking, making a career in PE is getting on (and obviously doing good work on) good deals. Like in banking, the best deals get sourced through / get staffed on / are done in NYC. This means better career advancement/lateral opportunities which presumably should lead to higher longer-term career pay.

I think to sum up, I place a very high premium on the "extra-curricular" activities that one has to do to land a good buyside gig. Maybe Booth has stronger academics and is more quant - but honestly PE is not that quant... Maybe Booth has better research coming out of it - but again, I can't imagine PE would care about that. Lever up, buy out, FCF, pay yourself a dividend, sell out. The math isn't that hard, and learning the complex deal structuring mechanics are best done on the job.

So if you are going for a real rigorous academic experience, or want to join some kind of quant fund, then MAYBE booth wins out. But I for one am not looking to get an MBA for the academics necessarily - I want to make sure I can get the best job possible out of it. This may not necessarily mean highest paying immediately, but that's a part of it. And also, if you want to go quant-style, they TRULY don't put that much value on an MBA anyways.

So if its a fundamental, value-based, long-term buyside experience you are looking for, I am personally of the opinion that outside of Harvard, Stanford, and Wharton, the next best MBA is Columbia.

Nov 24, 2014 - 8:24pm

ProfessorOAK:

I can't imagine there would be a significant difference in immediate post-MBA comp, although I wouldn't be surprised if NYC is a bit higher due to cost of living (which like you pointed out, gets canceled out easily). But longer-term, here are the reasons why I think NYC has a definite advantage:

1. It's a numbers game. Supply of PE positions < Demand for PE positions. NYC has more supply. I agree to get out of the mentality of thinking only about the megafunds. Smaller MM PE shops exist in both NYC and Chicago, but again, NYC has more. Not only more, but successful buyside recruiting is about getting facetime and convincing people that you, out of the dozens competing for your position, are best equipped to handle the job. This can be done through direct meetings and 2nd degree / 3rd degree connections/referrals. If you are up for it (and this is a big if), I think you can build up a more robust RELEVANT network in NYC by going to CBS than in booth.

2. Deals. Like in banking, making a career in PE is getting on (and obviously doing good work on) good deals. Like in banking, the best deals get sourced through / get staffed on / are done in NYC. This means better career advancement/lateral opportunities which presumably should lead to higher longer-term career pay.

I think to sum up, I place a very high premium on the "extra-curricular" activities that one has to do to land a good buyside gig. Maybe Booth has stronger academics and is more quant - but honestly PE is not that quant... Maybe Booth has better research coming out of it - but again, I can't imagine PE would care about that. Lever up, buy out, FCF, pay yourself a dividend, sell out. The math isn't that hard, and learning the complex deal structuring mechanics are best done on the job.

So if you are going for a real rigorous academic experience, or want to join some kind of quant fund, then MAYBE booth wins out. But I for one am not looking to get an MBA for the academics necessarily - I want to make sure I can get the best job possible out of it. This may not necessarily mean highest paying immediately, but that's a part of it. And also, if you want to go quant-style, they TRULY don't put that much value on an MBA anyways.

So if its a fundamental, value-based, long-term buyside experience you are looking for, I am personally of the opinion that outside of Harvard, Stanford, and Wharton, the next best MBA is Columbia.

Totally agree with ProfOak once again. I don't know if these are stereotypes but the impression I have is:

CBS-> Hands on experience, Booth-> Academic rigor

I think it depends on the discipline your targeting but agree CBS fits more on the PE industry dynamics than Booth for the reasons mentioned.

Nov 24, 2014 - 8:20pm

Love how half the people aren't even answering the original question and rather things like, 'Booth is better for PE in Chicago'. The guy was asking about the reputation in Brazil. For most developing economies where the wealthy are obsessed with brands, the Ivy League reputation will reign supreme. Therefore, for the OP, his should rank should be Wharton, Columbia, Chicago.

Nov 24, 2014 - 8:27pm

DickFuld:

Love how half the people aren't even answering the original question and rather things like, 'Booth is better for PE in Chicago'. The guy was asking about the reputation in Brazil. For most developing economies where the wealthy are obsessed with brands, the Ivy League reputation will reign supreme. Therefore, for the OP, his should rank should be Wharton, Columbia, Chicago.

Thanks Dick, that was spot on and I always had that in mind someway but wanted to be absolutely sure I wasn't missing on anything. Could you share a bit about your background/exposure to Brazil and LatAm region, I buy your argument it is only that I hadn't appreciated that the Ivy status mattered that much specially when so many people outside the US rely on rankings to make business school decisions and surely the 'appeal' of a Booth MBA is winning over many.

Nov 24, 2014 - 8:36pm

I am well aware of the OP's question and his LatAm background and interest. But since I know so little about LatAm PE, I'm not going to pontificate on it.

Regarding your latter point. Yes, internationals are obsessed with branding, but they are also obsessed with rankings, especially US News and Businessweek. Booth has dominated CBS in these rankings for like the last 5 years. I think it's far fetched to argue that these rankings have had no impact on internationals' perception of these 2 programs.

Nov 24, 2014 - 8:43pm

mbavsmfin:

I am well aware of the OP's question and his LatAm background and interest. But since I know so little about LatAm PE, I'm not going to pontificate on it.

Regarding your latter point. Yes, internationals are obsessed with branding, but they are also obsessed with rankings, especially US News and Businessweek. Booth has dominated CBS in these rankings for like the last 5 years. I think it's far fetched to argue that these rankings have had no impact on internationals' perception of these 2 programs.

I think an important question here is:

" What do PE recruiters in this part of the world put more weight on: tradition/prestige or rankings/present - do they really regard Booth as a top school for PE even though there aren't too many people outside Chicago in the industry? Are they willing to give people from Booth a shot because of the strong name and academics the school has built in the last couple of years? Or will they rely on the fact that CBS has a stronger name in the IB / PE industry traditionally so they will go with CBS even knowing about the school's short term problems with attracting ultra qualified top notch students as it did before?

Nov 26, 2014 - 3:38pm

DickFuld:

Love how half the people aren't even answering the original question and rather things like, 'Booth is better for PE in Chicago'. The guy was asking about the reputation in Brazil. For most developing economies where the wealthy are obsessed with brands, the Ivy League reputation will reign supreme. Therefore, for the OP, his should rank should be Wharton, Columbia, Chicago.

I love how this topic is now on page 5 with dozens of long-winded posts but the kid has yet to even get into W/CBS/Booth.

Nov 24, 2014 - 8:31pm

Why do people try to speak so authoritatively about programs they haven't attended, let alone applied to (yet)? If you haven't taken an MBA course or experienced MBA recruiting, please stop speaking like you're an expert on PE recruiting at each school, and their respective curricula. It undermines your credibility.
:)

Nov 25, 2014 - 3:32am

Jlgdr - Why are you responding to every single post and why are you asking the same question over and over. BTW, mbavsmfin (Brady) goes to Wharton and probably got rejected by CBS. The irony here is that he failed at getting buyside gigs coming from a finance background and is "settling" for IBD. I would be bitter too.

This post started off good but as someone mentioned, is one of the worst in recent times.

Nov 25, 2014 - 8:02am

alreadyrich:

Jlgdr - Why are you responding to every single post and why are you asking the same question over and over. BTW, mbavsmfin (Brady) goes to Wharton and probably got rejected by CBS. The irony here is that he failed at getting buyside gigs coming from a finance background and is "settling" for IBD. I would be bitter too.

This post started off good but as someone mentioned, is one of the worst in recent times.

Because I started the thread asking for opinions so its only polite to respond not to every post but to posts that provide helpful information. Certainly, this is an exception. If you don't like the thread you are welcome to try another one. If you want to contribute with something helfpul, you're welcome :)

Nov 25, 2014 - 9:33am

Let's get the objective here clear....OP wants to work in BB IB in NY post-MBA, and return to Brazil (emerging market) for PE after 2 year stint in NY IB. So having say that, you need to consider the following points:

1. For sell-side IBD, since neither Wharton/Columbia/Booth makes any differences in terms of placing in NYC, you need to consider how your decision impacts PE recruiting in Brazil.

2. Which brings you to think which school provides the strongest INTERNATIONAL reputation in PRIVATE EQUITY, not some mutual fund/Asset Management in the US (hint: see where am I going with this?).

3. So which school most likely has better reputation GLOBALLY (we don't care about in US since OP wants to work in Brazil PE), and also strong in PRIVATE EQUITY? below are my 2 cents:

Wharton: Ivy-league matters tons outside of US, so whoever chooses UChicago over Penn/Columbia if you want to work internationally is just silly. Plus Wharton is the king in PE out of the 3 schools in discussion here. Don't shoot me any "rigorous academic/curriculum in finance" crap and the "asset management/quant finance/mutual fund/long-only/hedge fund" crap. OP wants PRIVATE EQUITY, very different animals. So Wharton wins here.

Columbia: Again Ivy-league here, which matters a lot if you want to work in an emerging country like Brazil. Plus Penn/Wharton and Columbia have much better prestige and rich families in BRICs countries send kids to Ivy-league in US exclusively (if not + MIT/Stanford and elite liberal arts like Amherst/Williams). No body outside of US cares about or maybe heard of Booth. I maybe agree Booth is getting strong domestically, but no way in hell is it as competitive internationally as Wharton/Columbia.

Booth: what edge does Booth have in international private equity compared to Wharton/Columbia? Booth is known as a quant/geeky school that's highly academic and also it's affiliated with UChicago, which also is a tier below Penn/Columbia in terms of global reputation in finance/private equity in general.

So to summarize my points here - OP wants BB IBD in NY so neither school matters in this instance, however the ultimate goal of returning to Brazil and work in Megafunds PE means you need the best pedigree possible (rich/influential social status) and let me tell you Wharton/Columbia certainly are miles ahead of Booth.

Nov 25, 2014 - 9:39am

Et quidem eum velit fugiat. Et nemo dolores laboriosam modi voluptatum tempore dolorem. Dolores perferendis ut sunt saepe dolorem autem. Temporibus repellendus non qui nostrum. Corporis et et quaerat aut ut consequatur quibusdam. Aut sint repudiandae alias quia.

Nov 25, 2014 - 6:11pm

Dignissimos natus natus similique et quo. Odio facere doloremque dolor est quis qui voluptas. Autem velit ratione dolor odit beatae. Quia natus libero nostrum dolores excepturi nesciunt quia. Qui numquam odit sunt qui quia voluptatum optio.

Corrupti accusamus et sint quam. Repudiandae veritatis accusantium non est beatae. Velit quo et dicta sint.

Reprehenderit doloremque perferendis repellendus. Vel soluta voluptas voluptatem aliquid et. Ad rerum sint sunt.

Nov 27, 2014 - 6:23pm

Expedita corporis quia eos excepturi et dolorem. Quos reiciendis tenetur alias modi earum reiciendis asperiores. Itaque repudiandae delectus aut laboriosam alias cumque. Quo tempora quo quisquam et.

Nostrum mollitia explicabo ea quo similique. Commodi est aut corrupti omnis eos.

Aut temporibus aut repellendus aut est. Optio et repellat voluptas soluta. Aut sint praesentium minus ut tenetur fugiat amet est. Porro cum saepe quia enim. Est sunt accusamus dolorum iusto iure ab. Et ut commodi ex vitae.

Ex deleniti odio distinctio quo. Nihil animi voluptate facilis qui sunt. Cum quia rerum voluptas vitae dicta quia corporis.

The truth is you're the weak. And I'm the tyranny of evil men. But I'm tryin', Ringo. I'm tryin' real hard to be the shepherd.
Nov 25, 2014 - 9:43am

Veritatis alias ullam ut nulla itaque qui reiciendis nisi. At ea voluptatem aut animi libero. Excepturi amet dolorem labore. Officia doloremque nam saepe voluptate quae. Sit dolore sit ab eos dolorem.

Sunt voluptatem possimus velit magnam occaecati. Ratione consequatur vel et quam similique.

Sit non quia aut quis commodi explicabo suscipit aliquam. Ipsa excepturi est ea. Dolores occaecati repellat commodi nulla.

Start Discussion

Total Avg Compensation

November 2021 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (10) $853
  • Vice President (40) $360
  • Associates (234) $234
  • 2nd Year Analyst (144) $156
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (34) $154
  • Intern/Summer Associate (107) $146
  • 1st Year Analyst (514) $136
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (394) $84