All/most of the comments bashing UVA are from the same poster. The comments are of the same flavor, repeated over and over again. The poster starts and visits multiple ranking posts with the goal to bash UVA. Sometimes, they just respond “UVA” to a post on overrated schools (a thread they start). In other cases, they overstate the situation. Like on this thread, they keep repeating that “UVA is dead last.” It’s pretty specific language and wrong. When did placing 30 on a list of 4000 four-year schools make one “dead last”? They also consistently trot out the notion that UVA is Old South, racist, and a good-old-boy network. Not true. To have such a compulsion to hate the school, the poster obviously has an axe to grind.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CMC and Washington are Lee is a bit surprising. Does DC even know what W&L is?

And UVA is dead last?

This is a per Capita list so it controls for school population size. Notice how no other public schools made the list.

UVA is DFL. No excuses.

But the other public didn't make the list at all. UVA is the best public school for Wallstreet placement. That's shocking when Umich, UCLA, UCB exist.

For state universities, Berkeley, Michigan, and Texas ALL SEND MORE grads to Wall Street than UVA. And UVA is a couple thousand miles closer. These schools also send big time to Big Tech.

More overall and a higher percentage is a different thing. Schools like UT benefit from being gigantic. And most males at those schools are aiming for IB or FAANG so they have a ton of applications out of those schools. If you want you child to make big bucks as an analyst they have a better chance at UVA or one of the privates listed.

The lesson from this list is UVA is last place for Wall Street, and doesn't even show for tech. Good if you're paying in state tuition for your kid to get drunk a few times a week and relive the old South, but don't expect a big reward at the end. Not happening.

What an amusing little twit.

Anonymous wrote:This has little to do with the college and everything to do with the background of the kids. The overwhelming majority of the undergrads heading into banking have family already in banking; from dads to older brothers to uncles or grandpa. I'd estimate 75% are already connected, 20% are cute elbowy gals with at least a 3.5 GPA, and 5% are URMs with at least a 3.3 GPA.

I bet this list would barely change if you sorted for New England and Tri-State private prep school alums per capita.

As an alum of one of the NESCAC schools on this list, I agree 100%

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CMC and Washington are Lee is a bit surprising. Does DC even know what W&L is?

And UVA is dead last?

This is a per Capita list so it controls for school population size. Notice how no other public schools made the list.

UVA is DFL. No excuses.

But the other public didn't make the list at all. UVA is the best public school for Wallstreet placement. That's shocking when Umich, UCLA, UCB exist.

For state universities, Berkeley, Michigan, and Texas ALL SEND MORE grads to Wall Street than UVA. And UVA is a couple thousand miles closer. These schools also send big time to Big Tech.

More overall and a higher percentage is a different thing. Schools like UT benefit from being gigantic. And most males at those schools are aiming for IB or FAANG so they have a ton of applications out of those schools. If you want you child to make big bucks as an analyst they have a better chance at UVA or one of the privates listed.

The lesson from this list is UVA is last place for Wall Street, and doesn't even show for tech. Good if you're paying in state tuition for your kid to get drunk a few times a week and relive the old South, but don't expect a big reward at the end. Not happening.

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.

Stanford is better represented in Silicon Valley - although I’ve hear Canada’s U of Waterloo beats Stanford, CMU, and MIT in Silicon Valley.

They work cheap, And smile Canadian.

Waterloo is brutal academically.

Coop also helps big time.

Socially it sucks though

Anonymous wrote:This has little to do with the college and everything to do with the background of the kids. The overwhelming majority of the undergrads heading into banking have family already in banking; from dads to older brothers to uncles or grandpa. I'd estimate 75% are already connected, 20% are cute elbowy gals with at least a 3.5 GPA, and 5% are URMs with at least a 3.3 GPA.

I bet this list would barely change if you sorted for New England and Tri-State private prep school alums per capita.

Most ORMs at Feeders that go into IB or S&T don’t have banking parents.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What happened to HYPSM?

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

Stanford is better represented in Silicon Valley - although I’ve hear Canada’s U of Waterloo beats Stanford, CMU, and MIT in Silicon Valley.

They work cheap, And smile Canadian.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Claremont McKenna? Seriously?

Why is that so hard to believe?

Right. People should look into CMC. It is essentially a finance factory. In the class of 2018, 25% of graduates went into finance/accounting and another 17% went into consulting. Roughly a quarter of the class majors in economics. It offers one masters degree, which is in finance. If you look up its alumni, most are businesspeople/investors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CMC and Washington are Lee is a bit surprising. Does DC even know what W&L is?

And UVA is dead last?

This is a per Capita list so it controls for school population size. Notice how no other public schools made the list.

UVA is DFL. No excuses.

Nope. top 25 in USN&WR. And no. 4 of all public universities in the U.S.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s the scope of Wall Street employment? Does the list include I-banking only or does it include BS commercial banking jobs or worse yet back office and admin? I would assume the latter because that’s the only possible explanation for schools like SMU, UVA and W&L being on this list.

It says entry level IB analyst roles on the website. These roles pay well over 100k now. SMU, W&L, UVA are very good conservative (White) good ol boy schools with high test scores. I wouldn't expect anything different from them.

And within those schools, getting into the business school is highly competitive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As if a Wall Street job was something worth aspiring to.

Well genius, it obviously is if so many bright young minds from top colleges seek employment at i-banks. Now you can go back to gnawing on your government cheese and wait for your next handout.

Bright young minds? How about immature, dimwitted, connected lax bros?

This has little to do with the college and everything to do with the background of the kids. The overwhelming majority of the undergrads heading into banking have family already in banking; from dads to older brothers to uncles or grandpa. I'd estimate 75% are already connected, 20% are cute elbowy gals with at least a 3.5 GPA, and 5% are URMs with at least a 3.3 GPA.

I bet this list would barely change if you sorted for New England and Tri-State private prep school alums per capita.

These rankings measure graduates at roughly 13-15 investment banks or tech companies. It’s hardly a comprehensive survey. If you want to fight over these rankings have at it.

Anonymous wrote:Claremont McKenna? Seriously?

Why is that so hard to believe?

Claremont McKenna? Seriously?