Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free to post

Gmat importance

Announcements Posted on
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Hi All,

    When applying to Msc Finance programs, is your GMAT score considered to be the most important part of your application?

    Are their any bs who favor high Gmat scores vs Gpa?

    Thanks,

    Ebing
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ebing87)
    Hi All,

    When applying to Msc Finance programs, is your GMAT score considered to be the most important part of your application?

    Are their any bs who favor high Gmat scores vs Gpa?

    Thanks,

    Ebing
    High score is necessary, but not sufficient for admission.
    Low score is an automatic rejection.
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by janjanmmm)
    High score is necessary, but not sufficient for admission.
    Low score is an automatic rejection.
    Ofc, I agree. I was just wondering which part of your application bs find the most important.

    I have read somewhere that in almost 50% of the cases rejection to a particular bs was caused by a not sufficient gmat score, while rejection due to a not sufficient gpa was only caused by 25% of the cases.

    The article (which I have read on beat the GMAT) applied to MBA's.

    So I was wondering if the same applies for msc's. Or do some particular business schools favor the gmat more than any other part of your application (GPA,WE.EC,..)
    • 9 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ebing87)
    Ofc, I agree. I was just wondering which part of your application bs find the most important.

    I have read somewhere that in almost 50% of the cases rejection to a particular bs was caused by a not sufficient gmat score, while rejection due to a not sufficient gpa was only caused by 25% of the cases.

    The article (which I have read on beat the GMAT) applied to MBA's.

    So I was wondering if the same applies for msc's. Or do some particular business schools favor the gmat more than any other part of your application (GPA,WE.EC,..)
    Was there context to this article? For example, many people with low GPAs to begin with may simply not have applied, so naturally the % being rejected for low GPA will be relatively low. By itself this statement doesn't actually mean anything.

    I do know that eg Oxford (Said) MBA says one weak part of your application (eg GMAT) can be compensated for if all other parts are very good. I guess this is also a reason that they don't specify a minimum GMAT.

    Certainly, I would not go applying thinking a good GMAT score will necessarily offset a poor GPA, and this is probably even more true for finance programs than MBAs (where the latter you generally also have work experience as something to help offset a poor part of the application).
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    From my research and experience (got an offer from LSE and top continental programs), and friends who study or recently applied:
    1) In the UK each of the top programs seem to place emphasis on a different criteria:
    Oxford - work experience
    Cambridge - GPA
    LSE - GMAT
    Reason being - I know successful candidates at LSE with very weak work experience and high GPA and GMAT. Also LSE's average GMAT is very high (on par with Oxford, which is arguably more competitive). A lot of people in Oxford's class have some full time work experience and even those who don't have some very impressive internships - think GS/MS/JPM/etc. Pretty much all successful candidates at Cambridge seem to have a very high GPA - think high 1st or 3.8+.
    Warwick and Imperial don't require the GMAT and accept a lot of people with 2:1, so you should be fine with 2:1 and 680+ GMAT. Lot's of people with virtually no work experience get in.
    I do believe anything else in the UK offers absolutely no value for money, so I did not consider other programs.
    2) On the continent:
    On par with Warwick/Imperial - as long as you come from a decent school (not a trade school), meet the minimum requirements (2:1) and have a decent GMAT (650+, maybe even 600+) you are in. I'm pretty sure they care more about the GMAT than GPA. With a high GMAT (720+) they might close their eyes if you have a 2:2 or equivalent and something else going for you like good work experience/good personal statement/international exchange program/etc.
    Hope it helps.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by janjanmmm)
    Low score is an automatic rejection.
    haha this is such a myth...

    edit 1: In my experience LSE emphasizes your SOP and recs more than quant stats, e.g GMAT. I got in with a low score.

    edit 2: I got an offer from acc & fin.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blaasofapute)
    haha this is such a myth...

    edit 1: In my experience LSE emphasizes your SOP and recs more than quant stats, e.g GMAT. I got in with a low score.

    edit 2: I got an offer from acc & fin.
    They have cut off score. This is what I mean by the "low score". If your score is not perfect it is not necessarily "low".

    What is your score, anyway?
    • 10 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    The UK's top schools (LSE, Imp, Ox, Camb Judge especially) pay more attention to personal statements and top grades (68% +, 1.1 in Cambs case).

    In Europe, some schools place more emphasis on the GMAT (HEC, SSE) and interview (HEC) rather than on undergrad grades.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lego)
    From my research and experience (got an offer from LSE and top continental programs), and friends who study or recently applied:
    1) In the UK each of the top programs seem to place emphasis on a different criteria:
    Oxford - work experience
    Cambridge - GPA
    LSE - GMAT
    Reason being - I know successful candidates at LSE with very weak work experience and high GPA and GMAT. Also LSE's average GMAT is very high (on par with Oxford, which is arguably more competitive). A lot of people in Oxford's class have some full time work experience and even those who don't have some very impressive internships - think GS/MS/JPM/etc. Pretty much all successful candidates at Cambridge seem to have a very high GPA - think high 1st or 3.8+.
    Warwick and Imperial don't require the GMAT and accept a lot of people with 2:1, so you should be fine with 2:1 and 680+ GMAT. Lot's of people with virtually no work experience get in.
    I do believe anything else in the UK offers absolutely no value for money, so I did not consider other programs.
    2) On the continent:
    On par with Warwick/Imperial - as long as you come from a decent school (not a trade school), meet the minimum requirements (2:1) and have a decent GMAT (650+, maybe even 600+) you are in. I'm pretty sure they care more about the GMAT than GPA. With a high GMAT (720+) they might close their eyes if you have a 2:2 or equivalent and something else going for you like good work experience/good personal statement/international exchange program/etc.
    Hope it helps.
    How would you rate someones chances at the aforementioned b schools with a BSc Economics (2.2) and Msc Economics (Distinction) from the same institution (Bristol), with 3 years work experience in Big 4 Transactions Services/Corporate Finance, first time passes in ACA, and a decent GMAT??

    Edit: 2.2 was extenuating

    Already been given the OK by Manchester Business School but as you mentioned I'm wary that it may not be great value for money.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I study at MBS and yet my opinion is you should certainly aim higher than MBS. It's a good school, but not better than Bristol, so a MSc from MBS will not give you anything you don't already have - MSc from a top 10 UK university.
    Even with a 2.2 in your BSc, I don't think the top universities will see you as a risky candidate, especially if you are already ACA qualified. 80%+ of the students students in the Masters of Finance programs at LSE, Imperial, Warwick, etc. are:
    1) international and their language skills are not so good.
    2) with little work experience - maybe two or three internships at best. A lot of them will be aiming to land the kind of job you already had for 3 years.
    I believe the universities' main concerns are that you are smart enough to cope with the degree and that you are employable. Distinction in your MSc, first time passes in ACA, and a decent GMAT prove that you can deal with the workload. 3 years of work experience in Big4 and ACA make you more employable than 90% of the students in these programs. Thus, I'd focus my efforts on LBS MFin, Cambridge MFin and Oxford MFE (in this order). All three will be perhaps the best fit for you, as you will be studying among people with at least 2-3 years of work experience. I would not bother with the standard Masters of Finance degrees at LSE, Warwick and Imperial.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: April 18, 2012
New on TSR

The future of apprenticeships

Join the discussion in the apprenticeships hub!

Article updates
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.