Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Absolute numbers matter more than per capita. This whole thread is useless.

You can use the link in the OP to see the overall numbers list and the per Capita list. HYPSM do worse in the overall list. Mainly because they are midsized schools. Stanford is 21 and MIT is 29 on the overall list.

The list posted is I believe for IB analyst positions. Anecdotal based on my kid’s internship last summer: MIT and H appear to dominate in quant/hft trading eg 2sigma, hudson trading, jane st, citadel etc. OTOH, 20% of Stanford undergrads are CS majors and probably another 15% are related-cs (symbolic systems and product design)

Anecdotal based on my kid’s internship last summer: kids at Columbia SEAS often go to work at Wall Street. It was actually quite easy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Absolute numbers matter more than per capita. This whole thread is useless.

You can use the link in the OP to see the overall numbers list and the per Capita list. HYPSM do worse in the overall list. Mainly because they are midsized schools. Stanford is 21 and MIT is 29 on the overall list.

The list posted is I believe for IB analyst positions. Anecdotal based on my kid’s internship last summer: MIT and H appear to dominate in quant/hft trading eg 2sigma, hudson trading, jane st, citadel etc. OTOH, 20% of Stanford undergrads are CS majors and probably another 15% are related-cs (symbolic systems and product design)

I'm glad you realize it's anecdotal quant trading is not investment banking nor is it a big enough industry to do analysis such as this on. Stanford and MIT students might very much focus on other industries but in doing so they give up influence and a strong network within typical financial roles

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Absolute numbers matter more than per capita. This whole thread is useless.

You can use the link in the OP to see the overall numbers list and the per Capita list. HYPSM do worse in the overall list. Mainly because they are midsized schools. Stanford is 21 and MIT is 29 on the overall list.

The list posted is I believe for IB analyst positions. Anecdotal based on my kid’s internship last summer: MIT and H appear to dominate in quant/hft trading eg 2sigma, hudson trading, jane st, citadel etc. OTOH, 20% of Stanford undergrads are CS majors and probably another 15% are related-cs (symbolic systems and product design)

Anonymous wrote:Absolute numbers matter more than per capita. This whole thread is useless.

You can use the link in the OP to see the overall numbers list and the per Capita list. HYPSM do worse in the overall list. Mainly because they are midsized schools. Stanford is 21 and MIT is 29 on the overall list.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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....

Clever.
I will add: "Columbia and UChicago are better than Stanford, MIT and Yale"

Columbia is #2 according to USNews. You may not agree with US News. It shows reasonable minds see Columbia as #2.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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....

Clever.
I will add: "Columbia and UChicago are better than Stanford, MIT and Yale"

You decided to add UChicago to diminish Columbia’s standing among these schools, but we all know that’s futile rhetoric.

For undergrad, Yale is better than Columbia. But I think you can make a good argument that Columbia is better overall when you consider all the professional schools and grad programs. But keep on preaching that undergrad is the only thing that matters to a school. The hypsm prestige defense squad posters really sound like a broken record, don’t they.

the only broken record is you trying to make the phrase "hypsm prestige defense squad'" a thing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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....

Clever.
I will add: "Columbia and UChicago are better than Stanford, MIT and Yale"

You decided to add UChicago to diminish Columbia’s standing among these schools, but we all know that’s futile rhetoric.

For undergrad, Yale is better than Columbia. But I think you can make a good argument that Columbia is better overall when you consider all the professional schools and grad programs. But keep on preaching that undergrad is the only thing that matters to a school. The hypsm prestige defense squad posters really sound like a broken record, don’t they.

Anonymous wrote: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....

Clever.
I will add: "Columbia and UChicago are better than Stanford, MIT and Yale"

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....

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:What happened to HYPSM?

Right lol. But I think Stanford and MIT students focus mainly on tech.

More of a knock against Yale and Princeton. We all know that Stanford and MIT dominate tech, so we have an impression that HYP would be the top Wall Street feeders. But that doesn't seem to be the case.

I mean, it is still the case. Just because Yale and Princeton send fewer kids to finance than LOLChicago according to whatever metric this list used doesn't mean that they don't do well in terms of placement.

Does anyone in their right mind think that Columbia places better than Harvard?

I mean... Columbia does place better than Harvard...

Isn’t that what the Wall Street list shows? It shows Columbia’s placement rate is stronger than Harvard’s. And in Silicon Valley, Harvard is a lesser school than Columbia.

+1. Stop letting your HYPSM prestige obsession get in the way of acknowledging reality. A lot of schools, including Columbia, has a better engineering and CS school than Harvard, so it’s not even a surprise that they place better.

Not a Harvard fan but nobody in their right mind would choose Columbia over Harvard. They might choose Yale, Stanford or MIT over Harvard but NOT Columbia.

Plenty of people in their right minds might choose C over H for a variety of different reasons.

Finance placement, however, should never be one of them. A strong, motivated student will have far more first-job finance options coming from Harvard than any other school (except arguably Wharton).

Have you seen the placement rate that shows C tops H in Wall Street placement? Your need to improve your English comprehension.

The fact that Columbia sends more kids to IB programs or whatever methodology they use (I'm too lazy to read the article linked in OP) is irrelevant.

If a Harvard grad wants to go into finance, he or she will have more and better options than a similar Columbia grad.

This explains everything lol.

There's no reason to read it because it's clickbait bullshit.

Say it with me: Columbia does not have better finance placement than Harvard. If Columbia sends more kids to IB analyst roles than Harvard does it just means that the Harvard kids are choosing something else.

Are you the “lower ivy” dumb?

No Columbia dumb. Please cut the snark and fake news.

Columbia is technically a lower Ivy

Yes, Columbia is technically a lower Ivy. HYP became HYP because of football, but Columbia didn't even have a football team back then.

Absolute numbers matter more than per capita. This whole thread is useless.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What happened to HYPSM?

Right lol. But I think Stanford and MIT students focus mainly on tech.

More of a knock against Yale and Princeton. We all know that Stanford and MIT dominate tech, so we have an impression that HYP would be the top Wall Street feeders. But that doesn't seem to be the case.

I mean, it is still the case. Just because Yale and Princeton send fewer kids to finance than LOLChicago according to whatever metric this list used doesn't mean that they don't do well in terms of placement.

Does anyone in their right mind think that Columbia places better than Harvard?

The hyp obsession on DCUM is really bizzare, especially from a group of people with no ties to any of those institutions and who mostly went to schools like UVA and second-tier LACs and only use the acronym to bash other schools. Keep crying!

Let me understand YOUR LOGIC. If you believe that HYPSM are the top tier of institutions then you went to UVA.
I did not attend UVA (and if I did I would be proud of that fact.)
If I went to Columbia I would be proud as well but more so if I could attend HYPSM. Further, HYPSM could open more doors.

DP, it’s been proven again and again in this forum that Columbia opens just as many doors as HYPSM, and often more so than some of the five schools. Columbia has better placement than at least one HYPSM school in Wall Street, Silicon Valley, law school admissions, and more. Similar statements can be said for other top schools as well; HYPSM is not top 5 for “opening doors.” What makes you think that all of these employers and grad school admissions offices even acknowledge the HYPSM acronym and believe in its legitimacy? I think we can all agree that the only place where this acronym exists is DCUM and collegeconfidential.

+1000

It’s not as if these people with the HYPSM fetish have kids who go there.

If you went to one of those schools you don’t give a crap because you aren’t that insecure about it.

Based on the DCUM posts, hypsm grads are just as insecure when their alma maters got called out by trolls lol.

As we can see very well with a certain poster on this thread, "I went to school in Boston" folks aren't exactly the most secure ones. Kind of reminded me of the thread that freaked out all the Dukies when a troll basically said it was on the same tier with Vanderbilt.

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:What happened to HYPSM?

Right lol. But I think Stanford and MIT students focus mainly on tech.

More of a knock against Yale and Princeton. We all know that Stanford and MIT dominate tech, so we have an impression that HYP would be the top Wall Street feeders. But that doesn't seem to be the case.

I mean, it is still the case. Just because Yale and Princeton send fewer kids to finance than LOLChicago according to whatever metric this list used doesn't mean that they don't do well in terms of placement.

Does anyone in their right mind think that Columbia places better than Harvard?

I mean... Columbia does place better than Harvard...

Isn’t that what the Wall Street list shows? It shows Columbia’s placement rate is stronger than Harvard’s. And in Silicon Valley, Harvard is a lesser school than Columbia.

+1. Stop letting your HYPSM prestige obsession get in the way of acknowledging reality. A lot of schools, including Columbia, has a better engineering and CS school than Harvard, so it’s not even a surprise that they place better.

Not a Harvard fan but nobody in their right mind would choose Columbia over Harvard. They might choose Yale, Stanford or MIT over Harvard but NOT Columbia.

Plenty of people in their right minds might choose C over H for a variety of different reasons.

Finance placement, however, should never be one of them. A strong, motivated student will have far more first-job finance options coming from Harvard than any other school (except arguably Wharton).

Have you seen the placement rate that shows C tops H in Wall Street placement? Your need to improve your English comprehension.

The fact that Columbia sends more kids to IB programs or whatever methodology they use (I'm too lazy to read the article linked in OP) is irrelevant.

If a Harvard grad wants to go into finance, he or she will have more and better options than a similar Columbia grad.

This explains everything lol.

There's no reason to read it because it's clickbait bullshit.

Say it with me: Columbia does not have better finance placement than Harvard. If Columbia sends more kids to IB analyst roles than Harvard does it just means that the Harvard kids are choosing something else.

Like what? World domination?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:*cough*lacrosse*cough* at many of these schools


And other non Olympic sports at these particular schools

Yes, Wall Street loves the sports bros—they have a team spirit and willingness to sacrifice for the cause that translates well to business.

I worked on wall st in investment banking for years. Don’t underestimate the sports hires. We looked for analysts who were used to juggling multiple things at once and had good stamina. The competitive sports kids had balanced school and sports for years. They generally had no problem working really long hours at work and managing their personal lives without bringing baggage to work. You’d be shocked at the number of 4.0 grads who fizzled bc they were incapable of working in the real world and managing multiple things. I always dreaded seeing this profile of new analyst in my group. Most didn’t even last the first 2 years. The recent grads who had played sports or who had mediocre grades but great personal skills were fought over.

I went to a school on this list but will add there were always surprising feeder schools to the various banks solely bc someone senior at that bank had graduated from there. We could host recruiting dinners at our alma maters and push for summer interns from our schools, so you can see how some schools with lesser reputations ended up with disproportionate numbers of grads hired.

^i’ve got nothing to do with Columbia but come on. It’s the one school that can very well hold its own against HYPS.