<p>I am trying to decide where to go for college. My choice is between chicago, cambridge and lse (london school of economics). I was wondering whether anyone could offer any advice on which is best for getting a job in investment banking. I have no overriding preference as to where I live for the first few years out of college.</p>
<p>As of now I'm fairly sure my decision is between cambridge and chicago, and I'd appreciate any input you could give.</p>
<p>Thanks</p>
<p>TBH i would be surprised if there was any great difference in the prospects of a graduate of any of the three you are applying to as they are all world class institutions. I cannot comment on the reputation of each in the specific area you mention (investment banking) but Cambridge is a slight notch above either Chicago or London in terms of overall reputation etc.</p>
<p>i'd agree...cambridge has overall more appeal to IBs and graduate programs
n the way i was thinking is cambridge is as good as it gets in uk/europe as far as overall uni. reputation goes, whereas chicago, although top rkd in econ, still has formidable competition from the likes of harvard, pton, etc.
try to pm alexandre, who is pretty good at this kinda questions...</p>
<p>Thats where my problem lies. I know cambridge holds great weight in the uk and europe, however since the job market (especially for i-banks) is so much greater in new york, I wonder if going to chicago will maximize my chances of getting a job at an investment bank.</p>
<p>If anyone else can shed some light on the situation that'd be great.</p>
<p>Thanks</p>
<p>There's no way cambridge is "better" for investing banking than LSE or Chicago. If you ask me, I would say</p>
<ol>
<li>Chicago/LSE</li>
<li>Cambridge</li>
</ol>
<p>LSE would be an excellent choice for Europe prospects, and Chicago in the U.S.</p>
<p>I'd say LSE all the way. One of the absolute best schools in europe, where you can specialize straight away. You seem to know what you want, so unless you also want a liberal arts education go LSE.</p>
<p>to the last two posters:</p>
<p>Cambridge is ranked 1st in economics in the uk as compared to LSE which is 4th by most league tables so Im wondering where you got the information that lse is much better for investment banking.</p>
<p>Also does anyone know where I can find information on the amount or ratio of jobs in i-banking between the uk us and asia?</p>
<p>cheers</p>
<p>Uchicago is an excellent school. Bill is from there afterall. :)</p>
<p>Well if you think a 1st and 4th rankings has a lot of difference, I don't know what to say. But I can say that employers do not look at rankings and say "Oh ok, let's take the guy from the #1 ranked school"</p>
<p>LSE is right in the heart of London, and hence surrounded by investment banks who would clearly know what to expect when they get a LSE graduate. To the majority of people in the world, from U.S. to Asia, most would have heard of LSE and Cambridge. </p>
<p>The image of LSE is generally "economics and politics". The image of Cambridge is generally "Engineering". This is not to say all other disciplines are 'bad' .. just general impressions by most man-in-the-street.</p>
<p>Chicago, while excellent, might only be known in the U.S. and to a lesser extent in Europe or Asia.</p>
<p>So, I would say again:</p>
<ol>
<li>Chicago/LSE </li>
<li>Cambridge</li>
</ol>
<p>agrew with jkg. if you eyeing for i-baknking, i'd go for chicago.</p>
<p>It depends what your criteria is...
As far as employability goes (all over the world)... LSE pwns.
Academics wise Cambridge then UChic/Lse... IMO</p>
<p>I go to LSE and you get bombarded with investment banking info. They recruit really strongly to their London offices from the school but I have also seen offers for other countries including the USA and Asia.</p>
<p>i havent seen a single world economics ranking that places cambridge before the lse. it just doesnt exist onetwothree. this is the most complete ranking of economics institutions <a href="http://ideas.repec.org/top/top.inst.all.html%5B/url%5D">http://ideas.repec.org/top/top.inst.all.html</a> this is a ranking of all paper publications by its importance <a href="http://www.econphd.net/rank/nrallec.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.econphd.net/rank/nrallec.htm</a> and here is a ranking of econometrics done by yale based on graduate publications <a href="http://cowles.econ.yale.edu/areas/ecm/gsrank.htm%5B/url%5D">http://cowles.econ.yale.edu/areas/ecm/gsrank.htm</a> and here is the newest UK economics rankings <a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/section/0,,6734,00.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.timesonline.co.uk/section/0,,6734,00.html</a> just click on economics and everyone of these rankings place lse above cambridge. but despite all that, go to uchicago cause its better</p>
<p>I would go to LSE.</p>
<p>If I was going to do economics I would go to chicago but for a carrer in investment banking it would really depend in which country you would like to work. If UK I would defo go to LSE over Cambridge (as I did but not due to any IB related hopes) but if you want 2 work in the USA I would go to Chicago. But saying all this you are really lucky to be able to choose between these 3 world class universities.</p>
<p>Generalizations aren't 100% true but everyone (including employers) have them:</p>
<p>LSE:world-class, economics, independent, political, cosmopolitian, international, etc.</p>
<p>Cambridge: cuddled elite-class family, great manners and pedigree</p>
<p>Chicago: (much like LSE but without the worldliness and with a dilluted prestige due to local competition)</p>
<p>I really laughed when one poster pointed out that some rankings somewhere ranked cambridge economics above lse. Professionals and employers do not have time to waste tracking movements in the college league tables. (If they did, I wouldn't apply....they ought to be traking mortgage bond prices or something :))</p>
<p>Add: BTW, I would vote for a tie between chicago an lse. (Chicago has slightly more historical significance in economics, but lse allows for much more specialization and thus benefit from its economics dept)</p>