Msc Finance at Warwick : impressive figures

Original post by Borisvian

Hello,

I found these figures in Warwick university Website concerning the application at the Msc finance :

2009 : number of application received = 2326 ; admitted = 273 ; enrolled = 104

2010 : number of application received = 2323 ; admitted = 262 ; enrolled = 91

then the admission rate is 12% for 2009 and 11 % for 2010

It's very impressive (since this Msc has been opened in 2005)...what ur feeling about that...compared to Msc finance in others Business schools in Uk (Imperial, LSE, Cambridge)

source : http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/services/mip/businessinformation/academicstatistics/2010/warwick_business_school-social_sciences-2010.pdf

Warwick MSc Finance is very strong, one of the most pretigious in this country. But you cannot compare these figures with those for LSE and Cambridge because Warwick MSc Finance has a lower entry requirement, e.g. good 2:1 without GMAT.

The relatively lower entry requirement necessarily attracts more applicants because there are relatively much fewer people with first and good GMAT.

Reply 2

Borisvian

OP

I agree with you cause Cambridge and LSE are "la crème de la crème" so compared to these universities it's obvious that Warwick is a tier below...but what are about Warwick Msc finance relatively to Imperial...
Overall, it's clear that more than 2300 is wow...even in Cambridge and Lse they receive weak candidates with Low grades...Don't forget that Warwick offer a place to only 91 over 2300 (3,9%) , they reject 2209 candidates so i guess that those who received an offer are stellar...Few Msc receive such number of candidates...
According to the Stat of Warwick is by far the program that receive the largest number of candidates

can we order msc finance in Uk as follow :

Tier 1 : Cambridge/lse

Tier 2 : Warwick/Impérial

Tier 3 : Cass/Bristol/Durham/Bath

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 3

Imperial's MSc Finance is very strong not so much by the reputation of the course but rather by the reputation of its own brand name. In terms of entry requirement, I believe that Imperial's MSc Finance is lower than that for Warwick but the fees are a lot higher. Your choice of courses is a lot wider at Warwick than at Imperial.

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 4

Original post by Borisvian

Tier 1 : Cambridge/lse

Tier 2 : Warwick/Impérial

Tier 3 : Cass/Bristol/Durham/Bath

Personaly, I believe that LBS offers the best finance course master in the UK and one of the best in the world

Reply 5

student_london

8

Original post by Tarutaru

Personaly, I believe that LBS offers the best finance course master in the UK and one of the best in the world

Thank God. Someone is talking sense. :wink:

Reply 6

arkbar

12

I AM VERY IMPRESSED BY THESE NUMBERS.

numbersss

Reply 7

Borisvian

OP

Original post by Tarutaru

Personaly, I believe that LBS offers the best finance course master in the UK and one of the best in the world

LBS is a world class school, it's in its own league but unfortunately it's for people with more than 5 years experience...

so we can order school for Msc finance like that

Tier * : LBS
Tier 1 : Cambridge/LSE
Tier 1-2 : Warwick/Imperial

It's more astonishing given the fact that it's a young Msc with just 5 years. In a basket of 2350 candidate you really really can select the best of the best...
Do you have an idea about the number of application for Imperial...someone said me that is 1200 ?

There's a world ranking concerning only and exclusively Business schools : http://www.eduniversal-ranking.com/

For Uk : you have 7 business schools which are considered UNIVERSAL WITH A MAJOR INTERNATIONAL INFLUENCE (There's 100 BS in the world in this league) :

1)London business school ( 2nd Wld)
2)Said business school (Oxford) ( 10th Wld)
3)LSE (23th)
4)Judge Business school (Cambridge) (24th)
5)Manchester Business School (31th)
6)Warwick Business school (42th)
7)Cranfield School of Management (44th)

you have 7Uk business school in the TOP 50 and this ranking is reliable cause is just for BS cause usually rankings are for universities and we usually did a mistake by using Universities ranking for BS.... a university can be excellent but its BS can be a crap

Reply 8

mimconsultant

You cannot compare LBS MSc in Finance with that offered at any other UK B-School or University. The primary reason being that unlike other programs the LBS MiF is not a pre-experience program and admits only students with atleast 6 years of relevant work-ex (finance).

Amongst the others: LSE=Cambridge >Warwick=Imperial=Cranfield

I personally feel that Imperial MSc in Finance is a very well structured course and with the growing reputation of the Tanaka Business School and its strategic location in the heart of London will soon trump Warwick and catapult itself to the league of LSE and Cambridge.

Cranfield on the other hand also has a very strong reputation in Finance courses and their program being more old (hence mature) can be a good bet over Warwick/Imperial no matter what the application stats say.

Reply 9

Ineedaplace

7

so 171 candidates that were made an offer from Warwick fr MSc Finance rejected it....

only 91 accepted.

This is making me have second thoughts :frown:

From what I can gather though Imperial is sometimes seen as tier 1 while as Warwick is always tier 2. Such a dilemma...

Reply 10

Mr. Roxas

9

Original post by Ineedaplace

so 171 candidates that were made an offer from Warwick fr MSc Finance rejected it....

only 91 accepted.

This is making me have second thoughts :frown:

From what I can gather though Imperial is sometimes seen as tier 1 while as Warwick is always tier 2. Such a dilemma...

Actually, Warwick sends offers to more than 2 hundred pre-admits for about a hundred slots. Of those pre-admits, only a hundred or so are given the final offer. I've learned that from a number of Warwick MSc applicants.

Reply 11

Ineedaplace

7

Its because those other people don't give the £1000 pound deposit since they are probably waiting or accepted something better.

Reply 12

Original post by Ineedaplace

so 171 candidates that were made an offer from Warwick fr MSc Finance rejected it....

only 91 accepted.

This is making me have second thoughts :frown:

From what I can gather though Imperial is sometimes seen as tier 1 while as Warwick is always tier 2. Such a dilemma...

I guess that is because most of the applicants who apply to oxbridge and lse, apply to warwick as well.. and naturally if they get admitted for one of those 3 schools, they would decline warwick...

I still feel the Finance program at Warwick is one of the best.. its also got some amaxing research institutes set up in the feild of finance, which is bound to enhance its reputation in the future... :biggrin:

p.s ne 1 thinks that it will matter alot, if ur doing a Financial Math course instead of a course in Finance, when applying for jobs in the IB sector...

Reply 13

Original post by kuzelle

I guess that is because most of the applicants who apply to oxbridge and lse, apply to warwick as well.. and naturally if they get admitted for one of those 3 schools, they would decline warwick...

I still feel the Finance program at Warwick is one of the best.. its also got some amaxing research institutes set up in the feild of finance, which is bound to enhance its reputation in the future... :biggrin:

p.s ne 1 thinks that it will matter alot, if ur doing a Financial Math course instead of a course in Finance, when applying for jobs in the IB sector...

Yup, that is highly possible and reasonable. With regard to the debate between Warwick and Imperial, I would personally choose Imperial over Warwick because of the brand name. Warwick is not well-known AT ALL outside the UK. And except a few departments such as the Economics Department and the Business School, Warwick is just above-average standard in the UK and average in the World.

In contrast, the Tanaka Business School is at least as good as the Warwick Business School but the overall reputation is much much stronger both in the UK and outside the UK.

Reply 14

Original post by Tarutaru

Yup, that is highly possible and reasonable. With regard to the debate between Warwick and Imperial, I would personally choose Imperial over Warwick because of the brand name. Warwick is not well-known AT ALL outside the UK. And except a few departments such as the Economics Department and the Business School, Warwick is just above-average standard in the UK and average in the World.

In contrast, the Tanaka Business School is at least as good as the Warwick Business School but the overall reputation is much much stronger both in the UK and outside the UK.

Well you would be surprised about the reputation Warwick has in Asia... and from what I've heard it boasts of a pretty impressive alumni base in Asia as well... :biggrin:

..

However, like u said Imperial has got its brand name as top notch University, though I do have doubts on how top level Investment Banks in the UK and Europe rate it, especially in comparision with uni's like HEC... Regardless Imperial would be a stellar choice if u dont mind payn the extra fees, and livn in London (which I strongly dislike for some reason.. :frown:

)...

Reply 15

Original post by kuzelle

Well you would be surprised about the reputation Warwick has in Asia... and from what I've heard it boasts of a pretty impressive alumni base in Asia as well... :biggrin:

..

However, like u said Imperial has got its brand name as top notch University, though I do have doubts on how top level Investment Banks in the UK and Europe rate it, especially in comparision with uni's like HEC... Regardless Imperial would be a stellar choice if u dont mind payn the extra fees, and livn in London (which I strongly dislike for some reason.. :frown:

)...

Well, perhaps you are right as I really have no idea about the actual reputation of Warwick outside the UK.

My comment was based on the various World University Ranking tables. In all the tables, Warwick is not even a top 50 universities in the world. And according to the one published by the Shanghai Jiaotong University, Warwick is even ranked among 150 - 180.

Reply 16

Original post by Tarutaru

Well, perhaps you are right as I really have no idea about the actual reputation of Warwick outside the UK.

My comment was based on the various World University Ranking tables. In all the tables, Warwick is not even a top 50 universities in the world. And according to the one published by the Shanghai Jiaotong University, Warwick is even ranked among 150 - 180.

that is a very good point and one that I was not aware of.. However I gues it is best to look at ranking of Universities based on the feild ur r going to enter to... and Warwick ranked in the top 3-8 in feilds such as Economics, Maths, and Acc and FInance.. Besides ranking systems are'nt always the best guide when selecting post grad study, as it takes a lot of factors which are sometimes irrelevant into account. It is best to probably look at the research rating of the departments.. that should prob give u the best idea as to how good a uni is..

Besides employers tend to go with reputation than rankings.. for eg Leicester was ranked number 5 in the UK for Mathematics, which was well above LSE.. But a graduate from LSE would have a significant advantage over a grad from Leicester when applying for jobs... Just shows the inconsistency of the ranking systems.. :frown:

Reply 17

Mr. Roxas

9

Original post by Tarutaru

Yup, that is highly possible and reasonable. With regard to the debate between Warwick and Imperial, I would personally choose Imperial over Warwick because of the brand name. Warwick is not well-known AT ALL outside the UK. And except a few departments such as the Economics Department and the Business School, Warwick is just above-average standard in the UK and average in the World.

In contrast, the Tanaka Business School is at least as good as the Warwick Business School but the overall reputation is much much stronger both in the UK and outside the UK.

To be fair, Imperial isn't well-known in many parts of the world too despite its being an engineering and science powerhouse. And, to be frank about this, only Oxford and Cambridge are well-known outside of the UK. LSE is highly respected internationally, but only to those who care. And so are LBS, Warwick, Cranfield, Edinburgh and Manchester.

In the business and corporate world, Warwick is more regarded than Imperial. believe it or not, even Cranfield is more regarded than Imperial. And, I think that's what matters more if you care prestige as being directly relevant to your career. You couldn't care less what your barber think about your diploma. But you care what your employers or business associates think about it.

Reply 18

Borisvian

OP

Original post by Tarutaru

My comment was based on the various World University Ranking tables. In all the tables, Warwick is not even a top 50 universities in the world. And according to the one published by the Shanghai Jiaotong University, Warwick is even ranked among 150 - 180.

I said above that we should compare Business school with business schools not universities go to the ranking of Eduniversal...you have the TOP 100 among business schools...and Imperial is not even in the TOP 100...i think that eduniversal is more reliable...cause usually ranking are only about MBA...or universities...
Moreover we are talking about Msc finance so about the financial field in UK..London is with NY one of the 2 biggest financial places....so if you did an Msc which is well known and well regarded by the finance professional in London it's enough...
Personally i think that Warwick and Imperial Msc finance are peers and both of them are targeted in London
Having an Msc in gardening from princeton or harvard has no value in the financial field...Imperial is top notsch for science and enginnering..not business studies...Definitely Warwick is better in finance and business studies...WE ARE TALKING ABOUT BUSINESS SCHOOLS AND FINANCE NOT UNIVERSITIES AS A WHOLE...(Check EDUNIVERSAL for business schools)

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 19