Wallstreet Feeder Schools (Per Capita)

[Anonymous]

DP. The ranking threads on DCUM are totally childish. Any educated person knows there are various college rankings making somewhat different assumptions. They also know the approximate pecking order of schools. Most of this doesn’t change much over a few years, but can change somewhat over several decades. All that said, it makes little sense to squabble about grouping schools within the rankings, annual changes, etc. Why? Because in the larger scheme of things, these nuances don’t matter. At every school, there are variances in departmental strength, and student’s ultimate success depends also on ambition, perseverance, personal connections, and job geography. In sum, it would be delightful if we could stop these ranking threads because debating them truly is the work of children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not affiliated with either Columbia or Princeton but I have to say NYC seems more enticing than a boring NJ suburb.

Princeton is a lot nicer to live in than morning side heights, especially if you are an athlete.

Columbia students look like bug people — it’s weird.

Yes, if you are an athlete, Columbia is the only ivy with its line of outdoor sportswear and gear - Columbia Apparel, Outdoor Apparel & Products. How do you beat that?

In addition to that Columbia has its own broadcast network and record label. Who else can say that?

That’s amazing!!! Helps build school spirit. Wink.

Columbia is obviously the BEST

of the lower Ivys

You must have missed this post earlier in the thread:

Phrases people use that let me know they are unintelligent:

Anything racist
"I'm Just Saying"
"For All Intensive Purposes"
"I did my own research about vaccines"
"It is what it is"
"Snowflake", "Crotchfruit" or anything similar
"Lower Ivy"

I'm just saying....

Do NOT agree that using the descriptor "Lower Ivy" indicates lower intelligence given it refers to the reality that, in terms of prestige and ranking, some Ivy League institutions are stratified as "upper" while some are stratified as "lower".

Speaking of how Wall Street banks and and elite employers perceive these schools, which is the actual topic of this thread, here is a quote from a research article titled "Ivies, Extracurriculars, and Exclusion: Elite Employers' Use of Educational Credentials:" "Brown, Cornell, Dartmouth, and University of Pennsylvania (general studies) were frequently described as 'second tier' schools that were filled primarily with candidates who 'didn’t get in' to a super-elite school."

The article surveyed many of the employers from these elite Wall Street firms, and this was the general consensus among them. In Wall Street, Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Columbia, and Wharton are the Upper Ivies. The original data from this thread supports this too.

So you can call Columbia a lower ivy, and no one will stop you, but no one will believe your words either.

I'm pretty sure Columbia is a lower Ivy.

Lower Ivy still >>>> whatever school you went to, my dear

Yes, Columbia is a far better school that I attended but it is still a Lower Ivy (lower than HYP).

Lower than HYP and about the same as Penn

Not affiliated with either school but Columbia > Penn State. End of discussion.

Wharton > Columbia College / Penn A&S > Columbia Engineering > Penn State

I don't understand what criteria you used to compare liberal arts colleges, a business school and an engineering school. If you have some top-secret formula that allows you to objectively compare these three types of schools, share it with us!

Just street prestige

I think Columbia Engineering is same as CC and Penn, but agree all below Wharton

On the whole, Columbia's closest peer schools are Penn and Duke

Bingo!

Columbia vs Penn (64%:36%)

https://www.parchment.com/c/college/tools/college-cross-admit-comparison.php?compare=University+of+Pennsylvania&with=Columbia+University+in+the+City+of+New+York

Columbia vs Duke (63%:37%)

https://www.parchment.com/c/college/tools/college-cross-admit-comparison.php?compare=Duke+University&with=Columbia+University+in+the+City+of+New+York

Bingo!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those of you calling per capita ranking BS... here's the ranking in raw numbers:

https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-banking

1. UPenn (486)
2. NYU (302)
3. Columbia (267)
4. Harvard (254)
5. Cornell (245)
6. Georgetown (225)
7. UChicago (224)
8. Berkeley (203)
9. Michigan (194)
10. Yale (181)
11. Duke (146)
12. USC (144)
13. UT-Austin (142)
14. Notre Dame (136)
15. UVA (132)
16. Princeton (131)
17. Boston College (127)
18. Brown (122)
19. Dartmouth (119)
20. UCLA (111)
21. Stanford (110)
22. UNC-Chapel Hill (88)
23. Northwestern (84)
24. Vanderbilt (84)
25. Emory (82)
26. SMU (72)
27. WUSTL (53)
28. Middlebury (50)
29. MIT (49)
30. Northeastern (44)

This is fabricated data. The true data would have HYPSM at the top 5. HYPSM confers a level of prestige that no other schools can match, and it opens every single possible door for its graduates.

hypsm prestige defense squad members are the most hilarious

please don't reply to your own posts just to push your stupid phrase.

I'm so sorry you're triggered. Poor fragile soul.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those of you calling per capita ranking BS... here's the ranking in raw numbers:

https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-banking

1. UPenn (486)
2. NYU (302)
3. Columbia (267)
4. Harvard (254)
5. Cornell (245)
6. Georgetown (225)
7. UChicago (224)
8. Berkeley (203)
9. Michigan (194)
10. Yale (181)
11. Duke (146)
12. USC (144)
13. UT-Austin (142)
14. Notre Dame (136)
15. UVA (132)
16. Princeton (131)
17. Boston College (127)
18. Brown (122)
19. Dartmouth (119)
20. UCLA (111)
21. Stanford (110)
22. UNC-Chapel Hill (88)
23. Northwestern (84)
24. Vanderbilt (84)
25. Emory (82)
26. SMU (72)
27. WUSTL (53)
28. Middlebury (50)
29. MIT (49)
30. Northeastern (44)

These numbers are from linkedin? They look too small. The securities industry, a proxy for IBs, employs roughly 180k people in NY alone. The total of the above list is no more than 3k, or less than 1 percent of the total employees. So either a majority of the IB employees are not from the listed colleges, or the data source is too limited to draw any conclusion.

It’s only people working as analysts as thirteen or so firms. It’s a dumb list to use as a proxy.

The thirteen firms with the largest marketshare and national/global renown.... so it's definitely a good list. Plus it's only looking at entry-level analysts. Do you even read?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those of you calling per capita ranking BS... here's the ranking in raw numbers:

https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-banking

1. UPenn (486)
2. NYU (302)
3. Columbia (267)
4. Harvard (254)
5. Cornell (245)
6. Georgetown (225)
7. UChicago (224)
8. Berkeley (203)
9. Michigan (194)
10. Yale (181)
11. Duke (146)
12. USC (144)
13. UT-Austin (142)
14. Notre Dame (136)
15. UVA (132)
16. Princeton (131)
17. Boston College (127)
18. Brown (122)
19. Dartmouth (119)
20. UCLA (111)
21. Stanford (110)
22. UNC-Chapel Hill (88)
23. Northwestern (84)
24. Vanderbilt (84)
25. Emory (82)
26. SMU (72)
27. WUSTL (53)
28. Middlebury (50)
29. MIT (49)
30. Northeastern (44)

These numbers are from linkedin? They look too small. The securities industry, a proxy for IBs, employs roughly 180k people in NY alone. The total of the above list is no more than 3k, or less than 1 percent of the total employees. So either a majority of the IB employees are not from the listed colleges, or the data source is too limited to draw any conclusion.

It’s only people working as analysts as thirteen or so firms. It’s a dumb list to use as a proxy.

The thirteen firms with the largest marketshare and national/global renown.... so it's definitely a good list. Plus it's only looking at entry-level analysts. Do you even read?

I used the word analyst. It’s still a stupid list which is why it’s so attractive to you I guess.

[Anonymous]

These numbers seem far too low.