LSE Acc&Fin or Vandy MSF

Question

*

Lightmode · Answer

I always wonder why people who want to do prop trading,equity\FI research or any other non relevant things apply for acc or acc&fin. What is more suprising is that they get accepted. However, it's not your fault, is it? They should more carefully select people and you should accept vandy msf. Not only because of 15K but primarily because it suits more to your career aspiration.

mrmachineman82 · Answer

Well, in defense of the acc&fin program choice - you only have to take 1 accounting course and you have a choice over which one. I would most likely choose corporate financial reporting, which would be very relevant to equity research... other elective choices include derivatives, fixed income markets, financial time series, portfolio management, valuation & security analysis. You do not have to focus on accounting.

Lightmode · Answer

right, so you are telling me that if you got accepted to, say, MA in Divinity but are allowed to take FI or derivatives then it would be ok to go to prop trading or equity\fi research. No matter what courses you take it's still MA in Divinity, even though you don't agree with it. And let me tell you this: in the end of the day no one give a *** what courses you take, especially your potential employers. It's the name of the degree what counts out there. Because it is what you are going to put in your cv.

mrmachineman82 · Answer

So, I assume you think the word "accounting" in the degree name will send the wrong signal to employers? This is something I have wondered. You state that it is the name of the degree that counts, but some might argue that in high finance it is the name of the school that matters most. Consider the following links:

https://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/gradua ... areers.htm
https://www2.lse.ac.uk/accounting/prospe ... reers.aspx

I see a wide range of investment banking, research, and yes, even trading jobs from the accounting department of LSE. Vandy's MSF simply does not seem to offer the same opportunities. I still have not completely made up my mind, but may I ask why you are being so harsh?

Lightmode · Answer

First, you should carefully interpret the information provided on the school site, since they publish only highly selected information. And the reason they do so is surely not because they love the truth that much but to sell the program and the school brand. Plus the program coins 160 grads each year, so no wonder you see a wide range of jobs there.

Second, we never talked about investment banking, in fact, msc in acc&fin is primary source for ib recruiting at lse. We talked about fi\equity research and prop trading. And this sort of job, believe it or not, implies knowlege in economics and math. Even on those pages you sent me it shows only a couple of research	rading jobs. But what the pages don't tell you is specific info which makes up the whole story: 
a) Number of jobs taken. It may well be one or two out of 160 grads (+ diploma holders and earlier intakes)
b) Prior experience. It is falsely to assume that they talk only about 21-22 year old people straight from the student bench. We see lots of associates, senior something, even the head of something there. That means that those people had prior finance\management experience and not necessarily in accounting. And it's also likely true for those people who took research jobs. Furthermore, we can't rule out the possibility that those people didn't even change anything and just returned to their jobs they had before. As for a trader, this title also implies experience, since when you are recruited on trading desk straight from uni, you become an assistant trader. You don't fall in b) category, do you? 
c) on the acc&fin page you gave there are no traders at all. Do you think if they did have traders they wouldn't tell you about them at least for the sake of diversity? And there are no prop traders on both pages. There is a difference between trading and prop trading requirements. BB firms don't give a prop trading job without trading experience.

Third, no one questions the lse brand per se, but normally people in the right mind don't take, say, MSc in Gender with the aim to land a job in Quant Finance no matter how strong the lse brand is. But surely not those who might argue that in high finance it is the name of the school that matters most.

In sum, out of more than 160 people, there may be 1 or 2 people who took trading related jobs and several research jobs after graduation. Was this because of prior research	rading experince, nationality, connections, mere luck or any other non-degree related factors, we don't know. But what we do know is that betting 20 000 pounds on something that has such a low probability is not a smart move.

dan2012 · Answer

Are you a little sour from not getting an LSE fin&acc acceptance or something? Give the OP a break. This guy/girl just got accepted into two very good programs, and he/she has shown you that people do get trading/quant jobs coming out of LSE. All that was asked for was a simple opinion, not an insult.

BTW, I would recommend LSE, OP. And congratulations.

mrmachineman82 · Answer

Thanks for the responses.

To Lightmode:
First, let's forget about the trading jobs for now, since recruiters admittedly do prefer more quanty degrees. I was just pointing out that it is possible. I don't understand why you think that you need to be a quant to be in FI/equity research though. I personally know an equity research analyst with a masters in international relations and another with a masters in biology. All of the fixed income people I have met have either had an MBA or just an undergrad degree + CFA. These jobs don't require super advanced mathematics; there are probably quants on staff that can help, if needed.

You mentioned bias with the links I provided, which is certainly a strong possibility. However, compare these placements to what is listed on the Vanderbilt page - the jobs are simply not the same caliber (surely Vandy is trying to show itself in the best light as well). Every big investment bank comes to LSE, but who comes to Vandy? Also, one could flip your argument for why there are so few research jobs listed. It is possible that students only look to the IBD "holy grail" and would rather not be in research. Perhaps this is why there aren't many placements listed?

Nonetheless, much of what you have said has ran through my head before. Why not break down Vandy some now? Also, it would be nice to hear a bit of your background as well to know where you are coming from. Thanks.

nbd52 · Answer

I'd say just go to LSE and work in London for a few years. Be advised though, it will be difficult down the road to transition back to the States for a job. You will have to network for jobs here while you are in another country. That is always difficult. You may even have to go back for an MBA in the US to give yourself another opportunity for recruiting here.

Having said all that, LSE is the better school hands down. Great name recognition in Europe, 5 mins from all the major banks in London, it's probably got the strongest alumni base too. I just don't think you can pass up an opportunity like that. And I agree, Vandy job placements on their main page don't look to impressive. If those placements are on the main page they are their "cream of the crop" right? Not to promising.

Posted from my mobile device

Lightmode · Answer

Once upon a time, at a considerable distance from London, there lived a little guy. He wasn’t megaquant geek so he went to a grad school to get a law degree. However, shortly after that he joined trading arm of a small firm. No one could possibly imagine that the guy would become the head of the biggest trading business on this planet. This is not the whole story though. Now this guy’s giving interviews to WSJ and FT as the CEO of Goldman Sachs. There was another guy who happened to major in English literature. He managed to get a job as a bond trader at a firm which he eventually made the hottest place in the bond market. Meet John Gutfreund, the former CEO of Salomon Brothers.

So, of course it’s possible with whatever degree to go wherever you want - no one ever questioned that. But what I’ve been saying to you throughout the whole conversation is that it is not a smart move to bet like that. It’s not a sure thing, not even any close. It’s a gamble. You can’t assume that once a guy A made it, it is going to work out for me as well. Especially in such competitive field as finance and especially if you know that John Gutfreund’s father, for example, played golf with Billy Salomon, the son of the firm’s founder.

I don’t think you need to point out anything to me and give me examples of people you know. At least because I don’t buy anything here. The day I create a topic asking for advice, you’ll give me examples. That’s how it works. Meanwhile, it is you who asking for advice and I’m giving you my opinion. Now, the assumptions you make when you talk about various people in research is that: 
a) they have similar profile as yours; 
b) we have the same market as it was when those people got hired. 
But you don’t know owing to what they got their jobs: was it because of luck\parents
etwork\prior experience\etc, do you? But definitely not because of the degrees you mentioned. Furthermore, it’s not 2006-2007 anymore, when demand was higher that the number of people with relevant degrees and suitable experience. I assume that: a) based on your responses you don’t have relevant experience and b) you don’t have extremely powerful parentselatives\connections, otherwise you could take degree in something like music or egyptology and would not be asking for advice on the web. This all makes you one of the several thousand lse grads with similar profiles who apply for the same jobs in one location. Plus there are oxbridge and lots of other decent schools and several hundred thousand people with non-relevant degrees (they also believe they are competitive).

Considering all this, do you think you have the luxury to allow yourself to waste time, efforts and money on something which won’t stand you out? Can you allow yourself to think that employers having few spots available which are constantly shrinking and hundred thousand applications which are constantly growing will be wasting their resources to talk to someone who does not 100.00% meet their requirements?

As for your comment about IBD: they have many IBD placements from lse’s acc&fin not because a lot of grads look to IBD, but because majority of people who want to go to IBD go to this program in the first place because they know the program is the main source for ib recruitment.

Once again, I don’t say lse or it’s msc in acc&fin is bad per se. I’m answering the initial question of two options (lse acc&fin vs Vandy finance) taking into consideration your career preferences and giving you an explanation of the underlying logic behind it. I don’t know much about Vandy except for it’s a decent school and its degree is relevant to both of your career choices. Plus you said they give you 15K which makes lse’s acc&fin costs around $45K (15K + 20K pounds * 1.5GBPUSD).

nikhilkatira · Answer

Lightmode can we ASSUME that getting a job in US would be easy than in UK ( considering the employment opportunities in USA ).

I like your reasoning.

How good are MIT and Boston College for research type of jobs ?

Lightmode · Answer

nikhilkatira, I don't know

nikhilkatira · Answer

Hey Buddy I expected some concrete comments from your side.

Are my questions silly or wrong ?

I have just started researching MS in Finance programs in US.

mrmachineman82 · Answer

To anyone who is interested, here is a list of some of Vanderbilt's MSF student placements: https://www2.owen.vanderbilt.edu/summerp ... Stats.html

LSE Acc&Fin or Vandy MSF

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards