From LSE undergrad to MIT/Princeton

[Swayum]

Hi

I'm currently doing BSc Maths and Economics at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE). I am confused about what my chances are like for getting into the Masters of Finance courses at either MIT or Princeton.

The grading system is that 70% awards you the highest grade possible; First Class Honours. 60% is second highest, then 50% and then 40% is the lowest pass mark. My grades and courses so far:

1st year:

• Mathematical Methods (multivariate calculus and linear algebra): 81%
• Elementary Statistical Theory (joint distributions, regression, hypothesis testing, etc): 86%
• Economics B: 70%
• Introduction to Abstract Maths (some real analysis, groups, proofs, etc): 83%

2nd year:

• Macroeconomics Principles: 70%
• Microeconomics Principles II (very advanced micro course, a lot at the Masters level): 64%
• Real Analysis (topology in R^n, metric spaces, series, etc): 56% - a big let down
• Calculus (mainly integral calculus; multiple integrals, Leibniz rule, convolutions, etc): 89%
• Linear Algebra (complex matrices, Fourier series, special matrices like Hermitian, etc): 79%
• Differential Equations (solving linear, qualitative nature of non-linear systems, Poincare Bendixson, control theory, etc): 76%

3rd year (this is the final year which I'm currently studying for):

• Probability for Finance (measure theory, Lebesgue integral, probability spaces, etc)
• Quantitative Finance (forecasting risk and then Hull type stuff, will learn Matlab)
• Complex Analysis
• Advanced Economic Analysis (topics from Masters level economics)
• Principles of Econometrics

Work experience:

I have completed a summer internship at an investment bank in Trading. In particular, I was sat for 6 weeks on the sterling rates trading desk (so fixed income). I also did 3 weeks on equity derivatives; volatility trading.

Other:

I was Vice President of the LSE Finance Society (biggest society at LSE), helped to organise an Emerging Markets Conference and I am taking a 12 week C++ course.

I am sitting the GRE next week and I'm expecting to do very well on the maths section (close to full marks) and God knows what will happen in the verbal/writing sections.

Do you think I am a competitive applicant for the MIT and Princeton Masters of Finance programs? My issue is that I'm reading around and hearing about people who are in the top 1% of their university, where as I would probably place more around the top 10% - 15% at LSE. I have looked at the QuantNet Tracker but not found anyone from the UK, so I'm finding it difficult to compare myself with them.

In terms of the essays MIT asks you to write, do you have any guides as to what I should be writing about? I am currently treating it like an investment banking interview question, but am I supposed to make it more academic? If so, how?

 

[Andy Nguyen]

If you can show that you are a good fit for them, you will do well. I don't see anything that tells the contrary.
MIT would like to see diversified pool of candidates who are looking for roles in "sales and trading, corporate finance, investment banking, asset and risk management as well as private equity and hedge funds".

That is to say it is not an MFE program. So if you can convince MIT that it is unique as well as your career goal align with them, then you have a good shot.

 

[Swayum]

So I don't need to worry about my poor real analysis mark then you think?

In terms of career goals, I mean what am I really meant to write? "I want a job in trading at an investment bank and to then move into a quantitative hedge fund when I'm older". That's the truth and I really don't know how to embellish it any further or how to impress MIT.

 

[coldfile]

Is that the full list of the course?
I don't think MIT will not care about your absolute GPA.
Your ranking and school's reputation is more important.
If you can graduate with H1A, that will be make you somewhat distinguished.

 

[Andy Nguyen]

"I want a job in trading at an investment bank and to then move into a quantitative hedge fund when I'm older". That's the truth and I really don't know how to embellish it any further or how to impress MIT.

I wish I have a penny every time I read that. Truth is, programs are getting very skeptical of applicants who are dead set on a "trading job at an investment bank" job. First, they set themselves and the programs up to unrealistic expectation given the environment the finance industry has been through. Secondly, it raises questions about the applicant's knowledge about the current state of the industry.

That will impress MIT. For the wrong reasons.
Every programs I have talked to have been adopting to the changing market and they are preparing their graduates for the less glamorous but essential roles which was looked down upon years ago. I hear more from them about "SQL/stats/programming" and less about "trading/structuring/HFT".

 

[Nicolas.Ag]

Every programs I have talked to have been adopting to the changing market and they are preparing their graduates for the less glamorous but essential roles which was looked down upon years ago. I hear more from them about "SQL/stats/programming" and less about "trading/structuring/HFT".

From what i understand MIT and Princeton wouldn't like to hear about "SQL/stats/programming" since they are not true MFEs?

 

[Andy Nguyen]

From what i understand MIT and Princeton wouldn't like to hear about "SQL/stats/programming" since they are not true MFEs?

My comment is more to the majority of MFE programs but to these two specifically, they are known to market themselves as being flexible enough to help you with the career of your choice and I don't imagine they will look down on applicants who have desirable technical skills, all things being equal.

 

[martingaletrader]

I just love it when people plaster their whole transcripts on the chat page. The problem is everybody wants to be a trader at an investment bank. And as far as universities it is a bit silly to just target MIT and Princeton. There are other good schools. No guarantee. The best way to find out whether you will get accepted is to apply.

LSE is a great school, so getting into MIT or any top school should not be a problem. I understand people get trading jobs directly from LSE - as juniors on the desk.

In the US, normal MFE entrants have a few years experience and some have PhDs and published papers. Sure the schools will always admit people straight from school. I'd say Berkeley MFE students tend to be older so do the Princeton MiF ones. End of day going straight from school or working a few years - that is a big question. Each school will admit recent college grads as well as older people. It is competitive for everyone.

Placement at established programs has been hard going. MIT is a new thing. Consider all options and consider not applying for a while. Get some work experience or go straight. But whether you are 1% or top 10% of school. I think the admissions committee can see for themselves.