WUSTL MSF for Consulting? Any Olin MSF Graduates here?

I'm strongly considering attending WUSTL (admitted), but my short term goal is strategy/consulting (long term something in tech consulting/tech investing/VC). I have limited interest in IB. Background is physical sciences, 1 boutique IB internship.

WUSTL has a somewhat thin record on consulting placement (All MSFs seem to really, Vanderbilt as well).

My other choice would be Duke (ineligible at UVA), where there is a MUCH more consulting-focused approach, and perhaps better recruiting, though that's arguable (please don't argue about it here lol).


  1. Basically I want to know why WUSTL has very limited Consulting placements - is it because they don't recruit there, because people don't want it (it's a very hardcore finance curriculum I believe), or because they want it but the program doesn't really set them up for it?
 

I'd pick WUSTL. Consulting placements are going to be lower because people are looking to get into finance or related. If you want consulting I think you'd be fine if you targeted say FTI or Deloitte. Duke seems like the better choice because it is a target for the big consulting firms, but I think that will be out of reach for you with the MMS program.

 

Answer is really both - the top kids at Wustl MSF want IB / ER generally and the MSF brand isn't strong enough to place you in consulting if you're not a strong candidate. I wouldn't say getting into a big 3 consulting shop is impossible (one girl placed at Bain, for example), but it's definitely not down the middle of the fairway either.

Life's is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
 
Best Response

It's a tough choice (at least for me).

  1. It's not often discussed but after doing a lot of backgrounds on different school placements (including MBA programs, but I'll stay on topic for MSF here), I've found a lot of cause to think the school 'placements' can be very deceptive, and its absolutely not enough to just look at a list of places people go to work after they graduate - and that applies to everything/anything in my opinion.

The story behind each individual matters a lot.

  1. e.g. I deep dived on Duke MMS placements, and while on the surface they look quite impressive, once I start looking at the individuals who went to work in specific places, it definitely deflates/re-prices some of my first-look analysis. i.e. placements can be deceptive.

Duke MMS had 1 person go to McKinsey, which is great. But it turns out they actually worked at McK BEFORE the MMS program (in a non-US country), and went to a US office after the MMS. In my opinion the absolute single best qualification for working at a company... is having worked there already... so I would say this really weakens the argument that Duke was the 'reason' they went to work there.

I'm not sure if that makes sense to people, but to me, I crossed that out basically. Even if the program did help (and obviously a lot of it is about access - e.g. maybe other people got an interview at Duke there), but the fact that prior experience/story is what seems to drive the 'placement' and not the 'school' is a really powerful illumination that the school is doing a lot less than a list of all these fancy companies would make it seem.

MBA of course this is VERY well studied, many MBAs literally return to the company they worked at prior to their MBA (in a different role), so frequently the notion that a naive (in the scientific sense of the word) MBA student without that background is an equally competitive applicant is simply not true, except perhaps at the HBSes of the world (though even then I don't think its equal).

  1. So I (and I think many people who would have cause to visit a forum about finance careers) would tend to use 'adjusted' values basically when valuing schools as to which ones produce the most deltas for people. Which ones take someone who has no experience... and sends them to work at MBB, for example? (I know few/none, but my value metric stands).

  2. Other examples - Duke MMS class has MSFT placements, 2 of those people were prior software engineers who post-MMS went there to be... software engineers.

Another had UG in fashion design, did fashion, MMS, then... went to work in fashion.

So if one removes McKinsey, MSFT, Tesla, Uber, and AMZN from their placement list (these were all hires clearly based on experience/prior work NOT MMS/study)... their placements begin to look a lot weaker (to my eye).

  1. Of course I'm not saying these people could have just skipped their MMS/degree I'm sure it helped THEM; but it's a completely individual situation. If you're a software engineer already... it changes the calculus, you're simply going to be much more likely to get a software-related job than a peer without that past, and you will skew the placements when it shows that Google and MSFT hired graduates. Yes they did, but it's not reflective of just some generic value the program adds, it was THEM specifically.

  2. And this brings me to my final point; the valuation then of ANY (esp) business type school should either be 'assessed' on a case-by-case basis... or normalized to account for what is ultimately highly unequal outcomes because of highly unequal inputs (the people attending them).

Hence the old notion that (and its hardly true but) undergraduate college tended to be a place where people were thought to be on more equal footing since everyone attends high school in the US and... to first order most 18 year olds have similar work experience (little), etc. I don't want to argue about that point, but I'm saying basically... correct for the starting point.

  1. When I do that... Duke MMS begins to look a lot less impressive at least in this head to head. By contrast WUSTL has managed seemingly more zero to hero type deltas in terms of people who had no experience/weak background/started off worse... and ended a lot better off. So I would say that's the 'normalized' and 'generic' core of how to value a program ceteris paribus.
 

Stupidly complicated way of saying: it depends on the candidate - yes, it does.

Those 2 programs are comparable, obvious stated already - Duke 'sounds' better, looks better on paper, but ultimately no one really has any idea what either of those degrees are. The proliferation of MBAs already confuses people finance so you're going to be explaining to people what your alphabet soup is - I'd say Duke is just more recognizable, but its not like people are going to confuse you for a Duke MBA which is nother universe.

Basically if you want finance, IB or something quanty, do WUSTL - they def place there well even if things look a bit shaky on their placements, you can't escape lack of internships/experience, there will be placements at GS and another BB this year but those people had experience idk if theyd even interview people without an internship in hard finance. idk who gets finance jobs without the WE i dont think anyone.

If you want consulting/some 'analytical' type role do Duke more flexible. I think finance harder if you don't have the internships - roles for Duke MMS are wider so maybe you get more chances for diff lvl jobs (like maybe you apply no-name consulting, accent/delo, MBB; and see where you land on that line

If you just suck at interviewing, have no internships and have weird background its going to be pulling teeth regardless to get a job keep that in mind. You might have to get a weak role (sales or marketing) out of MMS (or MSF) and then try to move around - some Duke MMS people literally get jobs WORSE than the ones they had before most a little better - id say Olin is more average - completely my opinion. lots of the jobs Duke posts in tech or consulting are sales and advisory type roles which they dont mention so yeah a bit deceptive.

Duke also has like 40/100 foreign nats - counterintuitive but they actually get good roles probably since they get them abroad/home country/other reasons idk how many internats there are at olin.

*Also if you're worried about lack of 'finance' knowledge or whatever you can always do the CFA I while doing Duke - that might be a good way to supplement their (lack of) finance curriculum.

Basically figure out where youd fit better and do that.

 

I understand internships are very important, and I've heard I should be able to intern easily at WUSTL, and (mixed impression on Fuqua during the year, though I know over the winter people do it).

To broaden the discussion a bit outside of my personal questions; I think even if post-MSF/MMS people get a 'worse' job as you're calling them, I have to assume that it was still helpful. As someone who comes from a zero-finance zero-business zero-work experience pure academic background, I don't think I could really be hurt frankly; and I think a lot of applicants to these programs fell the same way.

I hadn't considered MMS + CFA though - that could be a good idea actually, I'll look into that. I don't know how difficult it is to study for CFA while also doing the MMS program, but having seen the level 1 curriculum it seems doable.

 

Necessitatibus totam rerum et labore. Illo temporibus at dolorem dolorem inventore maiores odit. Exercitationem nesciunt molestiae laboriosam omnis aspernatur omnis sint. Ducimus ipsam harum ipsum laborum est harum. Id impedit hic aut ab.

Nulla eos hic et nemo. Impedit necessitatibus minima aut quis atque labore maxime et. Accusantium tempora sunt mollitia.

Dolores eos praesentium odio et aperiam sunt. Recusandae molestias aut eaque est quo. Magnam eum itaque aut est est eligendi ea.

Error iste voluptatibus cupiditate totam reiciendis. Amet ipsam vitae aut nemo qui itaque. Et ad in quae quam. Laudantium assumenda inventore aliquid cum dolores dolorem. Laboriosam architecto modi accusantium molestiae iste soluta.

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (202) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (144) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
4
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
5
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
6
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
7
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
8
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
9
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
10
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”