Msc Finance at Warwick : impressive figures

borisvian you have alot of professional qualifications!!!! How long did it take to accumulate?

Reply 62

Borisvian

OP

2 years

Reply 63

Original post by Ineedaplace

tarutaru their is no need for sly jibes. I do have a understanding of economics and of finance. I do understand exactly the difference between finance and economic courses. Although I have not done so thorough research as some since I have professional exams coming up. You have made implications about "top 5 super-elite universities" and I was just questioning this phrase as like most people here in the FINANCE thread would consider UCL sub-par to Imperial and Warwick. If you can read I have applied to both economics and finance courses simply because I do not know whether to stay in the investment banking industry or want to be in a central bank. Also economics gives a broader spectrum of exit routes. It is absolutely ridiculous making an outright claim that I don't understand economics at all considering I graduated in the top 1% of my class, done more extra curricular things then you have thought of and attended post graduate economic modules at Harvard University. So please if you have something to say that is useful then do so, otherwise I would appreciate.

I dont think tarutaru was taking a jab at you. It is completely understandable that you want to go to a prestigious school, and UCL is considered one of the G5 in the UK. However, it is the clear 5th, and in subjects like finance, warwick is much further ahead.

I looked at UCL, and was disappointed that they didn’t do a finance masters. The most appropriate thing I found was statistics.

You do get the impression that when someone mentioned UCL, it suddenly became an option because of its prestige. This is understandable, but to apply for all finance masters and then consider economics (which with an undergrad in econ is justified when it comes to the content) at UCL, comes across as not knowing what you want.

I don’t think its that for you. You obviously want the prestige of the school on your CV (again, justified), which is part of my reason for taking a masters. It just makes things difficult if you choose a school on the basis of that as there are other things to consider. I say that because if you’re really wanting the school on your CV, I think economics or econometrics, at LSE would be better than UCL, and you would have a better chance because you don’t need the GMAT. Even psychology from LSE would stand you in good stead because it is no lie that recruiters at IB will look at the school first and then the subject. I geography undergrad from oxford has a better chance than me, for instance, of being called for an interview.

You said that you have an offer from Warwick, but probably wont take it. The manner of the way you said it (granted its in text and not speech ? ) came across as a little disrespectful. I know Cambridge is your first choice, but choosing imperial purely on the school if you really want to do a good masters in finance, may disappoint you. On the other hand, they are 3rd in the UK and rank 7th in the world on a ranking I saw, so the prestige of Imperial is undeniable, but they are certainly not 7th in the world in finance, so it just makes things more complicated.

Have you herd back from imperial yet? I just ask cos if you get all the offers you have outstanding i.e. Cambridge and imperial, warwick at the very least is a 3rd choice there. If you reject the warwick offer, you may not get an offer from either place and have nothing at the end of it. I’m not saying that will happen cos you have a very strong application, but you used the word hedge before, and that £1000 may just be that should the apps not go your way. £1000 is nothing to be thrown away, but as I have done, you may just need to see it as a write off just in case you decide/don’t get the other things you want.

Reply 64

Borisvian

OP

I have a simple question, please respond me frankly :

As i'm an international student, I want to know if doing an msc finance at Warwick will land me at least in a job interview, is it well established in UK and well recognised by IB recruiters in London ?

According to the following report (http://www.ljmu.ac.uk/WoW/WOW_Docs/GM10Report.pdf ) the targetted uiversities by the largest number of top employers are in order :

1) Manchester university
2) London universities (University of London, Imperial, LSE)
3) Warwick university
4) Cambridge
5) Oxford

Reply 65

kuzelle

Original post by Borisvian

I have a simple question, please respond me frankly :

As i'm an international student, I want to know if doing an msc finance at Warwick will land me at least in a job interview, is it well established in UK and well recognised by IB recruiters in London ?

According to the following report (http://www.ljmu.ac.uk/WoW/WOW_Docs/GM10Report.pdf ) the targetted uiversities by the largest number of top employers are in order :

1) Manchester university
2) London universities (University of London, Imperial, LSE)
3) Warwick university
4) Cambridge
5) Oxford

Frankly... Yes!!! it's a great uni... some of its alumni have gone onto work in some of the leading institutions in the IB sector... :biggrin:

.. only my humble opinion tho..

Reply 66

Original post by Borisvian

I have a simple question, please respond me frankly :

As i'm an international student, I want to know if doing an msc finance at Warwick will land me at least in a job interview, is it well established in UK and well recognised by IB recruiters in London ?

According to the following report (http://www.ljmu.ac.uk/WoW/WOW_Docs/GM10Report.pdf ) the targetted uiversities by the largest number of top employers are in order :

1) Manchester university
2) London universities (University of London, Imperial, LSE)
3) Warwick university
4) Cambridge
5) Oxford

Maybe not in that order. But from my experience talking with a lot of grads, Warwick will certainly get you in the door:

I thought this article was interesting:

http://news.students.efinancialcareers.co.uk/NEWS_ITEM/newsItemId-29203

They interviewed an LSE student who had secured a job, and when asked it they felt his uni gave him an advantage he said that he still felt that it was on par with Oxbridge/Imperial/UCL/Warwick.

For me I think the choice between Imperial and Warwick FOR FINANCE is a bit of a much of a muchness. Warwick with accounting and finance is very well regarded.
No uni will guarantee a position, but those unis, including warwick will give you a good shot at an interview, provided your academics are up to scratch and you have a decent amount of knowledge/ arent a complete tool :smile:

.

I personally know 4 grads from Nottingham who got into RBS/Barcap/J.P Morgan all with 2:1s (Chris from the Apprentice was also a Nottingham grad and he also worked at J.P Morgan). Notts is a great uni, but for finance, Warwick is seen as a much better place, so that at the very least should give you alot of confidence in Warwick (or maybe Notts :smile:

)

Reply 67

Yes Peaches I have an offer, but I am still undecided between Imperial and Warwick. I wasn't trying to sound dismissive of Warwick but due to personal reasons I can't really go there I don't think.

I am still undecided between Economics and Finance really as I do not know if I want to be in economic policy or stay in investment banking. I am not doing the masters to enter the corporate finance industry but looking more at the long run. Hence why impressing a randomer such as my grandmother might be more important then impressing employers. I am interested in structuring derivatives and exotic financial instruments though and the people from that side say Imperial is superior. I also don't mind throwing away 1000 pounds if I can't really make a choice right now, it is a life long decision that will stay with me forever and so £1000 is nothing in the long run.

So Warwick is not in the G5?

LSE, Oxford, Imperial, Cambridge, UCL?

I realise also that university doesn't equal automatic job. But it sure as hell increases your chances to get an interview. Also course content is important to me, I am particularly interested in both macroeconomics and behavioural economics in relation to Black Scholes Merton model amongst various other things. I just don't know what to pick and time is so hectic at the moment so I can't research. Hence the pick the most prestigious to impress randomners is the tactic i will go with....

Reply 68

Original post by Ineedaplace

Yes Peaches I have an offer, but I am still undecided between Imperial and Warwick. I wasn't trying to sound dismissive of Warwick but due to personal reasons I can't really go there I don't think.

I am still undecided between Economics and Finance really as I do not know if I want to be in economic policy or stay in investment banking. I am not doing the masters to enter the corporate finance industry but looking more at the long run. Hence why impressing a randomer such as my grandmother might be more important then impressing employers. I am interested in structuring derivatives and exotic financial instruments though and the people from that side say Imperial is superior. I also don't mind throwing away 1000 pounds if I can't really make a choice right now, it is a life long decision that will stay with me forever and so £1000 is nothing in the long run.

So Warwick is not in the G5?

LSE, Oxford, Imperial, Cambridge, UCL?

I realise also that university doesn't equal automatic job. But it sure as hell increases your chances to get an interview. Also course content is important to me, I am particularly interested in both macroeconomics and behavioural economics in relation to Black Scholes Merton model amongst various other things. I just don't know what to pick and time is so hectic at the moment so I can't research. Hence the pick the most prestigious to impress randomners is the tactic i will go with....

Warwick is not know as one of the 'G5'. Its a term that has been around for a while with relation to the 'top' universities in the UK. In banking terms the G5 might be viewed as:

LSE
Oxbridge
Imperial
UCL

In ranking terms (complete university guide):

Oxford
Cambridge
Imperial
LSE (5th)
UCL (9th)

Now people will say this is a bad thing, but Warwick was established in 1965. In less than 50 years it is the 7th ranked uni in the UK (in the ranking I looked at) and number one in accounting and finance.

I mentioned this link earlier:

http://news.students.efinancialcareers.co.uk/NEWS_ITEM/newsItemId-29203

This should tell you everything about the schools seen best for IB, and Warwick is absolutely there.

The point is UCL is the clear 5th, by far from what I hear, in the G5, and in my opinion, it is quite an old fashioned way to look at things, but it does carry realative weight depending on who is looking.

Imperial is an absolute powerhouse in science and engineering. I went to an presentation by the London uni's, and imperial are developing this spray that when you spray it on the skin, it turns into a material (awsome I thought), so good use in battle fields and stuff.
The reason why that will be targeted is because of the mathematical nature of these subjects and its tendency to produce the right kind of candidate suited to banking. It isn't targeted, at undergrad anyway, for its teaching in finance/econ/business simply because it doesn't teach that. So since the finance programme is so young it is difficult to determine how good they will be at teaching finance. It does however have the imperial name which speaks for a lot, and is the reason why I am so undecided (should I get an offer).

Warwick is certainly top notch. So much so, that if you get an offer from Imperial/UCL/Warwick/ (maybe even, possibly, depends on your preferences)LSE and want to go into IB, the choice really is about your fit to the uni and the course because each one of these places will get you the interview PROVIDED (not agressive, just to make it stand out :smile:

), you deserve the interview.

I have to say, from the other thread you started, I was under the impression that you were wanting to do CorpFin. It does come across as peculiar that now you are saying that are interested in structuring when before you also said:

'Anybody picking imperial over Warwick and reasons why? If you are not going into structuring.'

It does come across as a bit undecided. But if structuring is what you went, then obviously Imperial might be better. For me, I wanna get into trading, and structuring comes under the trading catagory. So that was why I felt Imperial was my first choice (above LSE).
But again, I do have no idea now what you want, so when you decide it may be easier.

Out of curiosity, where does behavioural economics come into the BS model that you want to look into? Derivative securities was a large part of my degree (which no matter where I go, is gonna be a module I take cos I know I love, and think I’ll do pretty well). We looked, quite in-depth to the BS formula and its derivation through Ito’s Lemma, and I was wondering what kind of behavioural economics came into the BSM model (genuine question).

Reply 69

Borisvian

OP

Original post by Peaches182

Maybe not in that order.

) :s-smilie:

)

But it's a statistical report, the numbers implies that order !!!

By the way, thanks for the article in efinancialcareers

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 70

Their is cutting edge research being done by several professors at the moment in relation to Black Scholes Merton and Behavioural economics. It is really quantitative in nature and is making a bit of leeway. Just google you should find articles.

The way I see things is that imperial is debatable at being the best for structuring. Warwick is not the best at corporate finance. As I have been rejected by LSE, maybe I just go with Imperial... for this reason and for brand name. But as I said I will research soon and get the entire scoop. Also I want to become more proficient in C++ which is offered by imperial.

Reply 71

Original post by Borisvian

But it's a statistical report, the numbers implies that order !!!

By the way, thanks for the article in efinancialcareers

Oh my bad. I didnt realise. Thats quite interesting then. In terms of the finance masters, I've herd the Imperials employment after graduate is quite low while Warwicks is rather high, and when you take into account that imperial has the so called 'London Advantage', it makes for interesting reading.

I'm looking back at my previous post, and I'm reading your question and it says to be frank and now I feel I was a bit washy in my answer.
I am a UK student, and the only reason I have put the £1000 deposit already if because I really do think that no matter where I get an offer from I cant do much better than warwick (and there arent many places that will offer a better programme). Although I am undecided on where I may finally end up, I do have the confidence to say that warwick would give me the opportunities to get to an interview.
I hope that link does tell you the way uni's look to IB's in the UK. The fact is warwick is absolutely gonna look good on anyone CV.

I found another interesting article on eFinancial:

http://news.students.efinancialcareers.co.uk/NEWS_ITEM/newsItemId-16753-startRow-1

The really interesting stuff is in the comments below. I will say when I read the first page, I got really depressed. The george guy in hedge funds says he only employs certain students from certain colleges from Oxbridge??
If you read on, you see that very few people actually agree with his views (I will say that I'm not dissing oxford grads). The point is people are quick to dismiss places like Cass for an MSc, but from the things i've herd from people who did the course, they seem to do fine in getting FO positions.

http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7795578&postcount=1

This list isnt definative, I think people will see imperial so high on that list and think, right, MSc Finance at Imperial then, but this mainly due to their science etc. Warwick is 5th on that list, so another thing to not get caught up in is thinking they will employ everyone from LSE, most from oxbridge, alot from imperial, a majority from warwick and so on.........it will mainly depend on the candidate, and from your experience and CFA etc, I you wanted to do asset management in an IB, in my opinion, you would have a great shot at an interview.

I will say these are just the opinions I am forming as I go along from listening to other people. But I am in the same boat as you so I just thought I'd let you know where my thoughts are at too.

Reply 72

Those articles were really informative making me want to firm Imperial more :smile:

This time not because of course content but just because of rankings LOL

I am not doing this to break into IB, but rather further my skills into a diverse skill set and have a more prestigious degree on my transcript. It is one of the reasons why I am considering taking less finance related masters.

I did not realise LSE was on the outer ring and Imperial was in the inner ring though. Really big news to me. Surely that does make out choices easier?

To be honest though as previously mentioned it does seem that they are both at least semi targets, and getting within the top 1% of your class with work experience should be good enough to secure you an interview.

Still I am biting my nails to see if I receive an offer from Cambridge Economics :smile:

Reply 73

Original post by Ineedaplace

Their is cutting edge research being done by several professors at the moment in relation to Black Scholes Merton and Behavioural economics. It is really quantitative in nature and is making a bit of leeway. Just google you should find articles.

The way I see things is that imperial is debatable at being the best for structuring. Warwick is not the best at corporate finance. As I have been rejected by LSE, maybe I just go with Imperial... for this reason and for brand name. But as I said I will research soon and get the entire scoop. Also I want to become more proficient in C++ which is offered by imperial.

Well the LSE MSc Finace isn't exactly best for structuring, it's very geared toward CorpFin and from studying Finance I really felt it just wasnt the best in terms of content. My point was not to place soooo much emphasis on LSE, its one school, you like me, didnt get in and have to deal with it. If you really wanted to get in, you should have taken the GMAT cos its difficult to see how a guy who says he graduated in the top 1% (although, why dont you just say you graduated top of your class, unless there were more than 100 people in your class, which seems a bit much) would not get in. You obviously have placed a lot on LSE but life goes on.

As for you with Imperial and Warwick, you already seem to have made your choice. So why bother asking which one, if you are already decided before hand, and you defo had made your mind up long ago. If your that undecided about economics or finance, why not take both, and do a finance and economics masters? Imperial dont offer that, but again, you shouldnt wanna go to imperial for economics.
Like the guys said before, you just seem undecided on your route. Warwick, Imperial, UCL will all get you an interview, none of them will get you palce, just as oxford and cambridge wont, its down to you.

Just make sure when you get your imperial offer, you dont start thinking, shall I wait for cambridge, cos it becomes a bit of a tight rope if you bank on that. Not that I'm saying you wont get in, cos you have a good app.

Reply 74

Original post by Ineedaplace

Those articles were really informative making me want to firm Imperial more :smile:

This time not because of course content but just because of rankings LOL

I am not doing this to break into IB, but rather further my skills into a diverse skill set and have a more prestigious degree on my transcript. It is one of the reasons why I am considering taking less finance related masters.

I did not realise LSE was on the outer ring and Imperial was in the inner ring though. Really big news to me. Surely that does make out choices easier?

To be honest though as previously mentioned it does seem that they are both at least semi targets, and getting within the top 1% of your class with work experience should be good enough to secure you an interview.

Still I am biting my nails to see if I receive an offer from Cambridge Economics :smile:

I never knew Imperial did a Finance MSc until I saw that list, saw imperial was 4th and then checked to see if they did :smile:

.

I know what you mean about the prestige thing though. The only thing is Imperial is that imperial is so good at science, that its difficult to know how good the finance part is.

The thing is with LSE is that it isnt that high, but for IB no matter what you study, they like.

Cambridge would be nice, but again, I've herd its very academic, alot of theory and I've read about a recruiters point of view on it saying so (in a bad way). Thats the thing with any uni, you've got the good and the bad points, but since your picking from the best Cam/Imp/War the choices can be trivial. If I got into Cam, I would really consider the PhD route. But I'm not gonna hold my breath

Reply 75

good idea, yep I think I have made my mind up but i will hold my breath for Cambridge lol....

Let me know what you decide to do.

I need to decided if I want to phd, structure, economics or what not.

Reply 76

Original post by Ineedaplace

good idea, yep I think I have made my mind up but i will hold my breath for Cambridge lol....

Let me know what you decide to do.

I need to decided if I want to phd, structure, economics or what not.

You even got an offer yet for imperial?? :smile:

Reply 77

Mr. Roxas

9

Original post by Peaches182

Oh my bad. I didnt realise. Thats quite interesting then. In terms of the finance masters, I've herd the Imperials employment after graduate is quite low while Warwicks is rather high, and when you take into account that imperial has the so called 'London Advantage', it makes for interesting reading.

I'm looking back at my previous post, and I'm reading your question and it says to be frank and now I feel I was a bit washy in my answer.
I am a UK student, and the only reason I have put the £1000 deposit already if because I really do think that no matter where I get an offer from I cant do much better than warwick (and there arent many places that will offer a better programme). Although I am undecided on where I may finally end up, I do have the confidence to say that warwick would give me the opportunities to get to an interview.
I hope that link does tell you the way uni's look to IB's in the UK. The fact is warwick is absolutely gonna look good on anyone CV.

I found another interesting article on eFinancial:

http://news.students.efinancialcareers.co.uk/NEWS_ITEM/newsItemId-16753-startRow-1

The really interesting stuff is in the comments below. I will say when I read the first page, I got really depressed. The george guy in hedge funds says he only employs certain students from certain colleges from Oxbridge??
If you read on, you see that very few people actually agree with his views (I will say that I'm not dissing oxford grads). The point is people are quick to dismiss places like Cass for an MSc, but from the things i've herd from people who did the course, they seem to do fine in getting FO positions.

http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7795578&postcount=1

This list isnt definative, I think people will see imperial so high on that list and think, right, MSc Finance at Imperial then, but this mainly due to their science etc. Warwick is 5th on that list, so another thing to not get caught up in is thinking they will employ everyone from LSE, most from oxbridge, alot from imperial, a majority from warwick and so on.........it will mainly depend on the candidate, and from your experience and CFA etc, I you wanted to do asset management in an IB, in my opinion, you would have a great shot at an interview.

I will say these are just the opinions I am forming as I go along from listening to other people. But I am in the same boat as you so I just thought I'd let you know where my thoughts are at too.

Interesting links, but they're quite old - already about 2 years ago. I'm sure what applied back then do not apply now anymore.

Reply 78

Original post by Mr. Roxas

Interesting links, but they're quite old - already about 2 years ago. I'm sure what applied back then do not apply now anymore.

Thats very true. For example Manchester is very low down in that list, although I do know it is targeted by quite a few IB's.
The 'which university is best for breaking into banking' was done Nov2010. Thats a pretty recent article which I found interesting.
It was more just to give people an idea on the uni's they look at most.

Reply 79