Top Feeders to Tech and Wall Street

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia is the winner for Wall Street by a long shot. They only have about 2,000 grads per year.
Cornell is twice the size.

Really? There at least a dozen schools including three NESCAC LACs which place considerably better than Columbia on a per capita basis.

These stats are also skewed by the types of kids who go to a school. I know a number of recent Columbia grads who are going into academia, public service, arts, etc. This dilutes the precious Wall Street/Tech stats that everyone here obsesses over, but those are still super impressive jobs. Making money is not everything.

This whole argument is ridiculous. The people who obsess most over these things didn't go to any of the schools even being discussed. Low class strivers sitting in cubicles and trying to help their kids do better than them but not realizing what it actually takes because they live in ignorant bubbles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Columbia is the winner for Wall Street by a long shot. They only have about 2,000 grads per year.
Cornell is twice the size.

Hmm, does Stern have 600 graduates?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia is the winner for Wall Street by a long shot. They only have about 2,000 grads per year.
Cornell is twice the size.

Hmm, does Stern have 600 graduates?

386/600 stern (maybe a few from cas) vs Columbia, mainly from econ/math?

[Anonymous]

Can’t put too much stake in analyses like these. As many people have noted it isn’t adjusted for school/program size, but it also doesn’t account for the quality or selectivity of roles (e.g., a GS TMT IB analyst role is much more desirable for most and harder to come by than, say, compliance at JPM, but they’ll both be counted the same way here).
Don’t overthink it - Stanford and MIT are still king for tech, Harvard and Wharton for finance. Much ink has been spilled looking at the top schools in these fields; the most useful information comes from looking in aggregate across sources.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can’t put too much stake in analyses like these. As many people have noted it isn’t adjusted for school/program size, but it also doesn’t account for the quality or selectivity of roles (e.g., a GS TMT IB analyst role is much more desirable for most and harder to come by than, say, compliance at JPM, but they’ll both be counted the same way here).
Don’t overthink it - Stanford and MIT are still king for tech, Harvard and Wharton for finance. Much ink has been spilled looking at the top schools in these fields; the most useful information comes from looking in aggregate across sources.

I guess graduates from the other 3,996 schools are doomed.

/s

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Getting hired" by a company doesn't account for what roles they are hired in. Lots of schools send tons of kids to mid and back office jobs at banks, or FP&A at FAANG. Perfectly fine jobs but not what Ivy Leaguers are aspiring to.

This. “Tech” and “banking” are not all the same jobs. MIT, ivies and Williams and a few others dominate top tech roles and top banking/quantitative finance roles.

[Anonymous]

Someone should compile a feeder list to Jane Street or other quant jobs. Cal is dwarfed by ivies + mit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can’t put too much stake in analyses like these. As many people have noted it isn’t adjusted for school/program size, but it also doesn’t account for the quality or selectivity of roles (e.g., a GS TMT IB analyst role is much more desirable for most and harder to come by than, say, compliance at JPM, but they’ll both be counted the same way here).
Don’t overthink it - Stanford and MIT are still king for tech, Harvard and Wharton for finance. Much ink has been spilled looking at the top schools in these fields; the most useful information comes from looking in aggregate across sources.

I guess graduates from the other 3,996 schools are doomed.

/s

Just because other schools can get you in the door doesn’t change the fact that those few at the top provide the greatest number of opportunities in these fields.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Getting hired" by a company doesn't account for what roles they are hired in. Lots of schools send tons of kids to mid and back office jobs at banks, or FP&A at FAANG. Perfectly fine jobs but not what Ivy Leaguers are aspiring to.

This. “Tech” and “banking” are not all the same jobs. MIT, ivies and Williams and a few others dominate top tech roles and top banking/quantitative finance roles.

Williams does not feed well into Quant finance. It feeds into IB well though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia is the winner for Wall Street by a long shot. They only have about 2,000 grads per year.
Cornell is twice the size.

Really? There at least a dozen schools including three NESCAC LACs which place considerably better than Columbia on a per capita basis.

Wrong. The NESCACs start placing around 10th best.

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forum/school/best-wallstreet-feeder-schools-per-capita

Don’t trust a list with Claremont McKenna beating out Amherst for wall street

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Getting hired" by a company doesn't account for what roles they are hired in. Lots of schools send tons of kids to mid and back office jobs at banks, or FP&A at FAANG. Perfectly fine jobs but not what Ivy Leaguers are aspiring to.

This. “Tech” and “banking” are not all the same jobs. MIT, ivies and Williams and a few others dominate top tech roles and top banking/quantitative finance roles.

Williams does not feed well into Quant finance. It feeds into IB well though.

+1, Quant finance is a very narrow career with few people in it: often looking for tech-based colleges like Gtech, MIT, Cornell, etc. Excellence in STEM matters a ton, and some schools, like Caltech which is very research based, are underrepresented.

[Anonymous]

Wealthy-a$$ families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia is the winner for Wall Street by a long shot. They only have about 2,000 grads per year.
Cornell is twice the size.

Really? There at least a dozen schools including three NESCAC LACs which place considerably better than Columbia on a per capita basis.

Data please.

https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/top-colleges-for-investment-banking-careers/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia is the winner for Wall Street by a long shot. They only have about 2,000 grads per year.
Cornell is twice the size.

Really? There at least a dozen schools including three NESCAC LACs which place considerably better than Columbia on a per capita basis.

Data please.

https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/top-colleges-for-investment-banking-careers/

I hope you don't beileve this. NYU is not that low

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia is the winner for Wall Street by a long shot. They only have about 2,000 grads per year.
Cornell is twice the size.

Really? There at least a dozen schools including three NESCAC LACs which place considerably better than Columbia on a per capita basis.

Data please.

https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/top-colleges-for-investment-banking-careers/

I hope you don't beileve this. NYU is not that low

It also says Columbia has lower placement than Vanderbilt? College transitions hasn't been a good data source for a while.