Not another WBS vs IC thread! (MSc Finance)

Hello, I thought it would be better to post the same question here since I had this under another thread. So here it goes...

I received an offer for the MSc Finance at Imperial, but now the problem is that I have to decide between that and Warwick. I am really excited about the WBS offer but now it's a bit of a dilemma, from what I hear both programmes are pretty much on par regarding the chances of landing you a job in IB-FO(London), or is the location factor a major one regarding Imperial over WBS? Offcourse when I say land you a job I'm reffering to "land an interview", from there on it's all you!

Would you say that WBSs MSc Finance is a bit more competitive?(Solely based on my own research regarding the number of places offered on each programme vs. number of applicants) Disregarding the small and maybe non-relevant gap in the FT rankings.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 1

effofex

Warwick is very well represented in FO roles. Easily on a par with Imperial. Warwick has a great alumni network. I would choose Imperial if you specifically want to target the buyside in algo trading roles.

Reply 2

rangervoong

Imperial takes around 200 for the MSc Finance and half as much for RMFE. (more graduates= greater number of alumni in the city)

but imperial has a better global recognition than Warwick,
Imperial is in London where all the HQ'S of banks/ hedge funds are.

it doesn't matter if warwicks seems more competitive, doesn't justify it being better.

as an overall institution imperial>warwick.