Msc Finance at Warwick : impressive figures

Scroll to see replies

emac1987

In where? In the business community? Amongst the academics? I honestly don't think so. In fact, most, if not all, rankings of business schools would say that Warwick has a far superior name than Imperial's. Imperial is only more prestigious to those who seek to become engineers and scientists. But for those who seek to join in the business community or the corporate world, the reverse is true. Like I said, even Cranfield and Manchester are more regarded than Imperial.

mmm seems a lot of people are saying that Warwick has a better reputation in business/finance than Imperial. This belief is not in line with the latest FT European Business Schools rankings as shown below:

2: LBS
11: Said BS
12: Cass
15: Cranfield
18: IMPERIAL
21: Warwick

And from the FT MBA ranking:

32: Imperial
40: MBS
41: Cass
42: Warwick

So, to everyone who says Imperial is only good for science and engineering and is crap in business........ HAVE IT!!!!!!!!

Reply 81

Borisvian

No one said that Imperial it's crap, but it seems that business it's not its core subject, it's became famous thanks to science...overall imperial it's a great university and better than warwick but in business, finance, accounting and economics warwick is a notch above...
challenge u to show me a Ranking for social sciences, management or economics where Imperial is above Warwick...
FT ranking is only about MBA PROGRAM not the whole business school...we said that above we are talking about the bulk

Example of rankings about the fields named above where Warwick is by far above Imperial :

Business studies in UK : http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/table/2010/jun/04/university-guide-business-and-management-studies :
Warwick 1st
Imperial 32th

Accounting and finance in UK : http://www.thecompleteuniversityguide.co.uk/single.htm?ipg=8727
Warwick 1st
Imperial not ranked

Social sciences and management in the world : http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2010/subject-rankings/social-science
Warwick 24th
Imperial 65th

Eduniversal.org exclusively about business school
Warwick in the first league 5 palms of the first 100th BS in the world
Imperial only in the second league 4 palms

and so on...

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 82

emac1987

Hi Borivian,

Just to clarify a couple of things.

Firstly: FT rankings is NOT only about MBA (thats the second ranking I listed in my first thread). The FT European Business School ranking takes into account MBA, Phd (research done by the business school), MSc Management and employability.
Secondly: The first 3 rankings that u provided in your thread only deals with undergraduate courses. Since Imperial barely offers any pure undergraduate courses in business/finance, it's not surprising to see that Warwick is way above Imperial on these tables.

I'm not familiar with eduniversal.org but given the choice between this source and the FT, think the FT is more common in the "business community".

Anyway, my original point is: Yes, Imperial is first and foremost an engineering/science uni but that doesn't make its business school less good that a uni with strong backgrounds in finance (ie Warwick). I mean, just take a look at MIT!! arguably the best uni in the world for engineering and only just recently, became a big player in finance with the Sloan School.

Reply 83

Tarutaru

Original post by Borisvian

Dude, as I said early, domestic rankings give a lot of weights to a dozen of silly ranking criteria... to understand rankings, I would suggest you to look into the ranking criteria used.

Warwick is ranked higher in domestic ranking perhaps is just simply because its accounting or busienss courses have a bunch of happier students or a bunch of people responding to the satisfaction survey after beers or drugs XD

Look at the world rankings which gives weight only to the research power of a university, Warwick is not even a top-50 university :frown:

It is even ranked among 150 - 180 in the ARWU, one of the two most famous world ranking table and one which gives very heavy weights to natural science subjects :frown:

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 84

Tarutaru

Original post by Borisvian

Not sure about what the ranking criteria are for the social sciences and management in the world and the Eduniversal.org.

For the Guardian and the Independent, the two tables which rank Warwick very highly, the criteria are:

The Guardian:

1. Teaching quality - as rated by graduates of the course (10%) (data source: the National Student Survey)
2. Feedback - as rated by graduates of the course (5%)
3. Spending per student (17%)
4. Staff/student ratio (17%)
5. Job prospects (17%) (data source: DLHE)
6. Value added (17%)
7. Entry score (17%)

The Independent

1. Student satisfaction - measure of the view of students of the teaching quality at the university (data source: the National Student Survey)
2. Research assessment/quality – measure of the average quality of the research undertaken in the university (data source: 2008 Research Assessment Exercise)
3. Entry standards - the average UCAS tariff score of new students under the age of 21 (data source: HESA data for 2008–09)
4. Student:staff ratio - measure of the average staffing level in the university (data source: HESA data for 2008–09)
5. Academic Services spend - the expenditure per student on all academic services (data source: HESA data for 2006–07, 2007–08 and 2008–09)
6. Facilities spend - the expenditure per student on staff and student facilities (data source: HESA data 2006–07, 2007–08 and 2008–09)
7. Good honours - proportion of firsts and upper seconds (data source: HESA data for 2008–09)
8. Graduate prospects - measure of the employability of a university's graduates (data source: HESA data for 2007–08)
9. Completion – measure of the completion rate of those studying at the university (data source: HESA performances indicators, based on data for 2008–09 and earlier years)

And look at the world rankings tables which rankg Warwick poorly:

Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU)

The ranking compared 1200 higher education institutions worldwide according to a formula that took into account

1). alumni winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals (10 percent)
2. staff winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals (20 percent)
3. highly-cited researchers in 21 broad subject categories (20 percent)
4. articles published in Nature and Science (20 percent)
5. the Science Citation Index and Social Sciences Citation Index (20 percent)
6. the per capita academic performance (on the indicators above) of an institution (10 percent).

QS World University Ranking

1. Academic Peer Review (Weighting 40 per cent).
2. Recruiter Review: weighting 10 per cent
3. Faculty Student Ratio: weighting 20 per cent
4. Citations per Faculty: weighting 20 per cent
5. International Orientation: weight 10 per cent

The conclusion seems to be that Warwick is a place with many happy or self-satisfied people but is just average standard in terms of overall academic performance and research XD

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 85

Borisvian

so Let's have a look to some international ranking

ARWU ranking for business/economics (It's an international ranking (your arguments about satisfication couldnt hold here and you said that's a very reliable one) :

Warwick 34 th in the world

Imperial 84 th in the world

So how you explain these GAP almost 50 between Warwick and Imperial

we are talking about BUSINESS not about nobel prizes...

YES IMPERIAL IS A GREAT UNIVERSITY AND HAS A BIG BRAND NAME BUT IN BUSINESS/FINANCE/ECONOMICS WARWICK IS BETTER
I still believe that Imperial is poor in business

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 86

kuzelle

Original post by Borisvian

agreed!!! bare in mind that Warwick has great links with employers in the financial sector as well, with many of its alumni going on to work in some of the biggest IB's in the world.. besides it invests heavily on research related financial markets, which is bound to improve its ranking in the future...

Reply 87

emac1987

OMG u guys are stupid! You're looking at the wrong ranking...

The ARWU ranking for business/economics, as the name implies, only concerns with research done on business and economics!

Since Imperial doesnt even have an economics dept and produces very little papers on business no wonder it's at 84th place.

If instead there was a ranking of financial engineering or mathematical finance then this would tell a completely different story as Imperial specialises in these financial subjects.

Reply 88

Borisvian

quantitative fields dont still matter in finance, we all saw how the complex and very quantitave products lead the financial world...since the last crisis we have a new paradigm...finance is not just mathematics so Imperial should wake up and focus on psychological finance and behavioural finance....
Imperial business school not imperial college is inferior to warwick business school....Imperial college london is superior to warwick university.....

Reply 89

Theophile

Some facts:

Imperial BS has constantly improves its ranking since its creation

It is the fastest growing department in Imperial

It got the second best score in "business and management studies" in the 2008 RAE

all this in 25 years ( Warwick BS is 44 yo).

not bad :smile:

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 90

Tarutaru

Original post by Theophile

I still strongly prefer Imperial and if you can afford it I would definitely recommend Imperial.

In addition to the overall reputation, I found the Imperial MSc Finance is a lot more technical and interesting...

Reply 91

Borisvian

Original post by emac1987

OMG u guys are stupid! You're looking at the wrong ranking...

The ARWU ranking for business/economics, as the name implies, only concerns with research done on business and economics!

.

But we are talking about business..not about science...as the name implies it's about business and economics and Imperial is poor in these fields, we talk about BUSINESS schools and in the ranking of business Warwick is 34 and imperial 86

Reply 92

emac1987

Original post by Borisvian

Borisvian, I don't think you're quite getting my point. I was criticising the AWRU ranking because it simply isn't the most appropriate ranking to compare 2 different business schools. The AWRU assigns 50% points to economics subjects and 50% to business subjects. Since Imperial doesnt do economics (at all), Warwick already enjoys a 50% lead on Imperial thus this ranking is bias towards Warwick. If you want to compare 2 business schools then the only ranking available (note, I'm NOT saying this is the best ranking, only saying this is the only ranking available) is the FT Business Schools ranking. This ranking ONLY looks at the performance of business schools and not their respective universities and as such offers the most unbias source to compare the "reputation" of business schools across the world.

Reply 93

Borisvian

Ok i get your point, but is not the only one..you have also EDUNIVERSAL ranking which is most serious and merely for business schools.
Since i will start an Msc finance in next September, even if i have warwick acceptance, i will choose Imperial for personal reasons (my friends are in London and is easiest to reach from overseas : Paris...etc) but i still believe that academically Imperial and Warwick are peers. I'm not against Imperial.
In France, Warwick has better reputation than Imperial...i know that Imperial exists since i started to look after Msc finance for pursuing my PG studies...before that, for me Warwick business school with LSE (and of course OXBRIDGE) were the best schools/universities for business in UK. In france, Warwick business school is synonym of excellence. In my former university in Canada, only the best of the best went in exchange to Warwick business school

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 94

emac1987

Original post by Borisvian

Don't you want to do a masters in France instead? heard placements are much better on the continent compared to the UK. I did my MSc at Imperial but I now wish I did it at ESSEC, Lyon or Dauphine cos internships are easier to obtain there and tuition cost A LOT less!!

Reply 95

Borisvian

A french proverb said that "the neighbour grass is always greener than ours" (l'herbe est toujours plus verte chez le voisin), i don't like the french system, from my own experience it's old-school. french schools like EM lyon or ESSEC are not recognised overseas (Asia,US...). You did a french school for working in france that's it that's all, Imperial and Warwick are by far superior to schools like EM lyon, ESSEC or ESCP, the only school in france that is on par is HEC.
BTW why you want to do another Msc, i think Imperial is TOP, what's going wrong

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 96

emac1987

Yea, that proverb is very true. Well after Imperial I still had a hard time finding a job that's why I said I wish I went to a French BS instead cos they would have provided me with an internship and since I had no previous banking experience then, this would have been very valuable to me. Got a job now so not considering to do another masters, one is enough! I do see ur point about French schools only being good for France tho but being french this wouldnt have been such a problem for me lol.

well i do hope u get an offer from imperial, I loved the course there. Found it very practical and challenging. Have u already sent ur application?

Reply 97

eco510

Yeah intern is very important if you consider FO roles. Even Oxbridge/ LSE Master students have a hard time getting FO offers without any previous interns. Uni Brand is less important than what many think. It is more that a certain caliber of students is often found at some specific Unis but its not that Uni brand is that much of a deciding factor (at least when comparing Unis like Warwick, Imperial or Oxbridge). Saying this I think the WBS Brand is strong enough. But like with every other Uni it wont get you into FO if the rest of your profile sucks.

Reply 98

Borisvian

Original post by emac1987

Have u already sent ur application?

I was talking of course about "mastere spécialisé" so i guess that you know what i mean...for these kind of master you need the three golden letters H.E.C...
I send my application and am still waiting for the result, but what is the cut-off in term of GPA (above a GPA 3.5 is it enough), i'm wondering if the fact that i have The whole FRM levels (L1 and L2) + CFA L1 and L2 + CAIA L1 and L2 could foster my application...
so "croisons les doigts" but what is your background, typically people from france who did imperial came from engineering schools

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 99

Theophile

Original post by Borisvian

I am French and I certainly disagree.

Original post by Borisvian

before that, for me Warwick business school with LSE (and of course OXBRIDGE) were the best schools/universities for business in UK. In france, Warwick business school is synonym of excellence. In my former university in Canada, only the best of the best went in exchange to Warwick business school

I am surprised, to say the least, you knew Warwick bs and not Imperial.
In France, Warwick bs has good rep but Imperial or LSE are far more well known.