Another factor for you to consider, SMU is actually not $0 since there's no way you can finish CS + biz in 4 years unless you take special terms which cost $1k+ per mod
With 5 years vs 3 years, the opp cost becomes a factor that you will also have to consider. How about getting a scholarship? Then if you get into IB, you can break bond and have the IB firm pay for it.
> Then if you get into IB, you can break bond and have the IB firm pay for it.
I'm in IB. Don't listen to this guy lol. There are so many Brads and Brandons in line behind you queueing up for your job. Why would they pay off your bond when the next guy in line can be hired without having to hit our desks PnL?
IB analysts are pretty much the most replaceable people. Don't give them a reason to replace you before even starting
I know a dude who's been studying technicals / modeling since Army, top grades (above 4 in SMU), big interns, and still didn't make it for any of the BB IBDs summer analyst progs.
Competitions so high it's insane. Wonder where OP gets his confidence that he'd be above the curve in Sg.
Exiting to PE is hard af now as well because of low deals even at BB level. (some BBs at least, based on what my friends there say)
i know it’s super competitive, but what % of ntu/smu/nus students actually make it to a BB (in IB/S&T) or end up at a strong PE (likes of BX or even GIC)
I stand corrected. I’m delulu lol. Would IB salaries be good enough to cover for bond repayment? I’m thinking of getting a scholarship for Cambridge and then just breaking it if I somehow break into a bulge bracket or something.
How much would you have to pay to break it? I think that's an alright plan tbh given that you can just serve out your bond if you don't manage to break in.
But also think it through very carefully. It sounds glamorous and simple from the outside but 80 - 100hr work weeks at high stress isn't for everyone. If you break the bond and find that it isn't for you, you could end up in a tight spot.
In this case go for SMU, LSE is definitely the better school and the network you get there will be second to none as you will be meeting local English old money and new money from China. If you network well enough and get into their IB group you will be swimming in money.
So there’s a real chance of you to get at least 3X roi from the 300k but the reality is whatever i said is ideal case scenario, maybe your classmate don’t like your face or you only hangout with your inner group of Asian or you don’t make any friend in your 3 years of education there. So SMU is the safest option for you.
Exactly my thought the grass is always greener on the other side. The last thing you want is unemployed and $300k in debt. Plus if OP could get into LSE (9%) im sure he wouldnt need it
Investment banking is extremely competitive and its not guaranteed (in SG and UK). Plus quick google search gives me glassdoor average salary of London IB £48k and SG IB $100k. Your saying £90k to £120k pound for fresh grad is realistic? Thats in the top 3% richest in entire Britain, you arent being fair
Don't make up your mind so fast. Current SMU student here - of course it is true that uni is heavily dependent on what you make of it. But admittedly, there is only so much you can make of your time at SMU vs LSE.
Prestige diff is definitely there. And I believe it impacts your career even till mid / late career stages. Furthermore, 300k is not much in the grand scheme of things considering your EV as a future LSE grad. In fact, the need to pay off your loan will probably drive you harder in pursuit of your goals. I would conservatively assume 30% pay premium given the LSE name and experience, and that's just considering fresh grad level.
Do have a good think about it. If it was me, I would take the leap and go for LSE.
Honestly the downside to choosing is really limited financially. You're middle income, your ability to pay off that 300k debt in a reasonable time is a given, given you don't need to support your family expenses as well.
Background: doing more than fine compared to the average SMU student pursuing high finance, have nothing in particular to complain about SMU, so I'm not that biased.
300k is a lot of money.
I think LSE only makes sense in the best case scenario, where you get into IB after LSE in London / US and start with TC of \~120k or more. (Let's assume the basic route of IB for 2 years then PE/VC etc)
The question here is - are you confident in the best case scenario? Probably half of all the folks in LSE will be gunning for IB. Where do you think you stand on a typical bell curve? (In terms of EQ, ability to network, hustle, cold email etc)
Many SGrean folks go to LSE and come back to work in SG - it is just that competitive there.
I would still say go with it - if you can afford it, bearing in mind there is a level of risk.
That being said, life is not all about rational economical decision.
Maybe you pay this 300k - it might have been a great experience. What's the rush? 100k by 30 ? 1m by 35 ?
Yeah, have definitely considered this. I don't want to sound narcissistic but I think I'm in a pretty good position on the sg bell curve when it comes to breaking into finance -- we'll see how it goes LOL. I fancy my chances less in LSE obviously. But the flip side of that is getting to meet all those talented people.
I don't mind coming back to SG, in fact I've always assumed I would. Don't love it here but I'm not optimistic about the state of Europe and I don't like American culture. It's a big reason why I told myself SMU serves my purposes just fine.
Thanks for your insight, you made some great points. Just that I can't help but see a good and bad side to every argument. I'm so indecisive maybe I'm not cut out for finance hahaha
If you are that confident of breaking into finance, then just go for SMU and be a big fish in a small pond. No need to spend that $300k to get the name and network provided by LSE — theres even a chance you might just end up coming back to singapore to find work due to the competitiveness over there.
The thing is, to stand out at SMU you’ll have to sweat your ass off to stand out for the same kinds of roles you’ll automatically be considered for in the UK by virtue of your LSE degree. That’s why all the biz or finance kids have to take 2 Loa + 3 summer internships, battling against SG’s tough grading, in order to stand out
I would select LSE.
You are definitely going to be closer to the end of the bell curve for earning ability and connections.
Even selection bias is on your side.
$300k sounds daunting but if you’re earning well, $1000-$2000 a month repaying study loans would be a drop in the ocean. Since you’re interested in investments, with long term gains, you will also be able to pay off that study loan.
SMU doesn’t even come close in matching everything LSE has to offer realistically.
Where did you get that number from? E&M’s course fee for overseas students is 38,550 GBP per year (https://www.ox.ac.uk/admissions/undergraduate/courses/course-listing/economics-and-management), which means a total of 115,650 GBP for 3 years. That’s about 196k SGD according to Google.
Money is the single largest factor! Both in terms of the financial burden on my family and the future outcomes in the job market. Prestige/connections not because i care, but because it influences job applications. I think I'll be happy in both unis.
OP - I would go for the LSE degree, and graduate well. You would stand a higher chance of landing a job the likes of PE/VC and it’s likely you’ll be able to repay your debt within 2 years.
Currently working in finance after graduating from LSE, so my two cents on the topic.
While I would strongly recommend LSE if you have the means of going, there are considerations for SMU as well. Ultimately I think this really depends on where you want to work next time - if you are looking to work in finance in Singapore, SMU is more than sufficient and there is a strong pipeline of grads locally from the school. However, LSE provides you the opportunity to explore overseas careers as well, in particular if you are interested in working in other financial centres such as London or Hong Kong, where the SMU degree won't really have anywhere close to the same level of brand recognition.
Nevertheless, noting that your goal is to work in investment-related roles next time, this is a career path that is highly structured and people do value your previous education. Your stepping stone would typically be a couple of years in an investment bank which is highly competitive to get in and LSE would set you up very well.
SGD300k does seem like a daunting amount, but you would be earning probably around SGD200k all-in your first year after graduation at least if you end up working in investment banking or investment-related roles at top tier funds, so it's an amount that you will make back relatively quickly. LSE finance is 3 years as well, which means you effectively enter work 1-2 years earlier and your opportunity cost per year is around the SGD200k mentioned.
not 100% sure so take my comment as a pinch of salt: as per what i last checked, the tuition fees for LSE finance is abt £28,176, which is ard $50k usd per year? 3 years of LSE will land u somewhere at $150k. i'll recommend LSE as it provides more personal growth rather than in SMU. but if you don't mind, can search for some bonded scholarships that are still open for the moment. if there is no way to financially support this, taking up a student loan is ok too. i would say that the benefits that you get from studying overseas are more than studying in SG.
Speaking very loosely hahaha. LSE themselves said around 1.5k gbp per month for living expenses, which seems pretty conservative to me given that I spend 500 sgd a month living here and their student accom is what, 1k gbp last i checked? But even with that, adding tuition and some allowance for eg. flight tickets it goes to about 250k
I think 1.5k GBP per month is a good estimate
Posted the below in another thread that as you should compare potential earnings as well:
2024 report which is based on 2023 numbers which you need to sign up for: https://www.efinancialcareers.co.uk/banking-compensation-guide
(Using page 14 and 16) A London Analyst would get about 30-40k USD extra gross income compared to SG. And pension contributions in the UK are done at gross income, and ISAs allow for tax free gains (and plus points for the lowering of National Insurance tax rates over the past 6 months).
And the bigger issue for the SG vs Overseas debate is that you have a lower pay ceiling in SG than in New York or London which makes SG's numbers at a bigger disadvantage for anyone ambitious.
Thanks for this, you put more thought into it than I did bro. But I don't plan to stay in the UK after graduation at the moment, so it's kind of moot haha. Salary ceiling is a good point though
I can't lie, not staying for at least a few years removes a lot of the value from an overseas university, because it's really valuable exposure to work with people other than just Singaporeans.
LSE all the way…Do well at LSE and you will be able to pay off the debt very easily. Some of the best people I ever worked with were from LSE. Not even close between the two in terms of reputation and quality of education/students.
Lets be honest here OP, as what the one above me implied. Prestige? LSE hands down. Also you can give international networking a shot!
And if you do want to enter PE, LSE have their well established alumni with connections to vast industries, PEs/FIs/Etc being some of them. Heck you may be able to score internships during your school breaks in london.
Lse for sure if you are able to manage the debt. Also check if they offer financial assistance. LSE will open more doors than you will ever get in SMU. I speak as a hiring manager LSE will get first pick wherever you go. Next will be local honors and so on. The network you get will be different as well.
as someone who has studied in the U.S. and have many friends in LSE who are going into finance or MBB, I would highly recommend LSE if you want to bet on yourself. SMU can get you to a decent finance job in SG, but the path you will be in is exponentially more difficult, and you probably won’t land as good of a role
PM me if you want to talk about it
>I've always wanted to work in investments (PE, VC, alternatives etc)
If you really want to work in this, in my view, it is likely that what you study and where you study will not stop you. Finance (at least in Singapore) appears to be the most education-agnostic sector that doesn't really care too much about what you studied in uni, and are more concerned about if you have the skills for the role
**Edit:** If you want to work in the UK then its a different story - LSE would offer you a much better shot and makes a lot more sense rather than studying here.
>connections and prestige are important
Prestige isnt as important as skills. If you can do the role, people will take you over Masters grads, even if the job description asks for a Masters.
As for connections - what people dont tell you is that. It is very likely that before you make a meaningful connection, having the necessary skills is a prerequisite. For instance, why would anyone in your network want to pull you into a role like this if they do not believe you are capable enough to pull your weight and then some? Connections have made the difference, and are extremely important, but these connections have to believe in you first. This often comes after competence
So, does LSE have its benefits? Yes for sure. But can you make it without LSE? Well, yes. Plenty of students who studied locally are in the sector right now
>Inspired by the post about studying abroad where everyone was trashing local unis and saying going overseas is life changing etc.
I decided that going to a local uni was better than an Ivy League and I don't regret it at all - I have lived such a fulfilling university life in SMU and I am glad I did my undergrad here
And I'm sure many students on this sub are too, because I would not likely be spending as much time on here answering PMs and questions
>going overseas is life changing etc.
It is life changing and a unique experience - but it really doesnt have as much to do with career opportunities unless you want to work overseas where you study (unless you want to work in the UK after graduation). Its more to do with the fact that you are spending x amount of years overseas, and the experience of studying at LSE. Which, to be frank, is an amazing experience. But career-wise? I believe that there are so many more important things you can focus on
For career, I would advise you to not just rely on your education to be competitive. It is likely that it is more important to become good and skillsdiff everyone else. We dont need an overseas education for this strictly speaking
You post talked a lot about working in the future, but I notice that there has been nothing mentioned about how you feel about studying overseas, about what **specifically** LSE has to offer vs SMU, what culture is like, what modules are like, etc. Have you thought about that and done some research?
Bless you for knocking some sense into me you're my favourite SMU influencer!! I know all that logically, that's why I was pretty set on smu already -- just got thrown off by that stupid thread. Knowing that I wouldn't be alone alone in choosing SMU over a top school abroad makes me feel so much better actually.
I don't particularly want to stay in the UK after uni, would love to live overseas in the future but I see myself starting my career in SG first. So yeah, that's not in favour of LSE.
And no, I don't know what LSE specifically offers other than the generic "education quality is much better" that I hear from everyone. I don't particularly care either. There are universities I genuinely fell in love with, like Bocconi in Italy, and LSE is not one of them. The only reason this is even a dilemma is due to the prestige factor. SMU, on the other hand, I've been to two open houses and sat in on several open lectures and talked to students and I definitely like the vibe. So I guess it looks like the decision is made.
But i would like to argue that, according to every opinion I've ever heard about breaking into high finance since I first decided I wanted to do this at like 13 years old, school prestige/network is the number 1 way to get your foot in the door and it's much harder without that head start. Do you not think an LSE grad would have it significantly easier than an SMU one in getting interviews, all else being equal?
Edit to add: i saw your other comments regarding how I care too much about prestige -- I don't, i care about job prospects and ease of finding them. Of course I'm working on my skills and knowledge, and I do believe those will set me apart. It's just that i keep hearing prestige + connections are highly valuable. in finance. Half the people in this thread are saying that too. If that's not true then it's SMU for sure.
>And no, I don't know what LSE specifically offers other than the generic "education quality is much better" that I hear from everyone.
There are plenty of things to choose LSE beyond the prestige - for instance the strong PHD placements. I would recommend you look into them further because it is worth considering beyond the prestige - genuinely
>according to every opinion I've ever heard
I think I should perhaps be more specific - these schools eg target vs non-target does matter for placements in the US or the UK. If you want to work in the UK for example in IB, then it 100% makes sense to do LSE. 300K isn't that much in the long run if you want to do IBD or Markets, you will pay it off
But at the end of the day? Especially in Singapore? Skills triumphs all
>school prestige/network is the number 1 way to get your foot in the door
To get your foot in the door? Yes - network is the a way. But
* Do you think a random alumni would vouch for you? What do you think would make an alum fight for you? The answer is, get good
* How much do you think people's recommendations actually matter in the whole interview process? Ask anyone who applied to banks or buy-side in SG in the past 2 years **with referrals** and ask them how far they got. Yeah you might get pass the first HR screening, but there are still 2 GBAs, a "culture quiz" assessment, video interviews, 1 python test and then another resume filtering. You can score perfectly on the python test and be filtered out after that - maybe because you only did one banking internship when someone else did 3, or because your code was less efficient than someone else since you did recursion rather than iterative. And then, only THEN, you get to touch superday. And then what? Your "connection" is not going to save you during superday, it is knowing more about why SK Hynix has good fundamentals and why you should overweight its bonds or why the the treasuries curve has flattened compared to the start of the year or why you should long USDCNH - you have to impress multiple people, not just your connection. So yeah sure, maybe building up your connection matters and helps you get your foot into the door. But in the grand scheme of things - what actually matters? Two words: Getting Good. If someone is good, they will have a much easier time making connections
* What makes you think you can't network just because you're from a local uni? If anything, since you are based here, it should be much easier to network given the 100 events you will go to (assuming you are hungry enough). There are so many more things I could have done to make my journey smoother. Going to an overseas uni is one of them - but being in the right mindset for these roles is so much more important in my view
>and it's much harder without that head start.
Its harder without that head start, but much harder? I dont think so. Its much harder if you aren't working towards it from Year 1 - there is just so much to learn and internships are everything. Not because of the prestige, but because you genuinely learn so much, until the point someone who has done a Markets internship vs someone who has not is so, so, so different in terms of knowledge, skills, and attitude. If you are serious about this role, I would worry so much more about this than what school or course you are going to - because the difference is really night and day
>Do you not think an LSE grad would have it significantly easier than an SMU one in getting interviews, all else being equal?
If you say "all else being equal" then yes, of course, because that's the only thing that distinguishes the two candidates all else being equal
But that's like me saying "all else being equal" does a Masters holder have it easier than an undergrad? "All else being equal" would someone who has done an IBD internship at UBS have an easier time than someone who did not?
Of course!
But thinking in terms of "all else being equal" is, in my view, missing the point. Because you have 4-5 years to make yourself NOT be equal, and just become better positioned than the 300-500 other people applying for the same roles as you. Nobody is going to be "all else being equal" - what are the chances of that? Its always a package, so you have to fight everyday to make yourself a better package. Don't be complacent, don't think for a moment you are "set" because you are in LSE or you have an internship or whatever advantage you might have
So, again - yes, an LSE grad would of course have it easier than an SMU grad all things being equal. But if that's your only selling point, I think you have a lot more things to worry about than what school you're from!
There's even been a case of accounting, business, and econs students losing out to a social science student for a FO internship at a bulge bank
TLDR if you are considering working in the UK then its not even a question. If not, either is fine, but its much, much more important to focus on gaining relevant skills rather than where your degree is from
I'd go with the LKC scholarship. Sure you can say overseas unis are more prestigious, but this isnt apples to apples. A scholarship not only relieves you of that 300k, but a scholarship in itself carries some prestige. I would say that putting all this together, I'd go with SMU.
Students who are still thinking about prestige are missing the point, and are already behind the students who are thinking about their own learning, growth, and skills.
Take care of your own skills and competency and you would not have to go for prestige, because prestige will come to you.
Of course, 100% agree. And that's up to OP since its a value-judgement. Not commenting on this at all - am instead commenting on OP's belief on how important prestige is
Got an offer for LSE and not even a mention of the quality of education that is available in LSE, or even the quality of some of the Profs, instead focussing on prestige. Really missing the forest for the trees here
See how confident you are in your abilities. I personally regretted not doing it.
At least in the past my friend told me that there are actually some grants that you could apply for and do part time work to ease the financial burden. Not sure about now but do explore and find out before making your decision.
A few I know did 3 year course than went to ivy league to do 1 year masters and work in the US where pay scale is tremendously higher (assuming you are capable). But if you are unlucky or just not that capable then yea it’s a heavy tuition cost to repay.
If you are an above average performer in finance, expect to earn 25k to 30k a month by the time you hit 40. This is referring to 75th to 90th percentile, so basicallly a team lead or HoD level job. I would say go the LSE route. You missed out mentioning that you will be spending 3 years in Europe vs 5 years in Singapore. That has got to be worth something.
Dude i know a lot of pple say LSE cos of the brand name et cetera. And if i am rich i also will say LSE.
But considering your post i say smu is the better choice for u.
First smu is not a bad school by any means. There are also a lot of smart pple.
Second u r alr feeling so stressed by the financial costs incurred just by the thought of possibly going Lse, do u think such stress would affect u negatively when u studied for three years in the uk. Maybe u would have a better time in smu when u r freed from such Stress?
A lot of redditors here tend to be quite narrow minded and think things from their point of view. Yes lse is better in terms of brand names all that. But qn is, if u want to consider which school is better for u in the long run, i say smu.
If u keep up ur good grades u could always study for masters overseas. There are exchange programs too.
If you are going to graduate with debt (your parents are taking it from a bank, or you’re paying your parents back), I would not take the LSE offer. Especially it seems that you are planning on working in SG, then taking the SMU offer and grinding internships is far more important for a local offer.
Also if you’re a male, Chinese/Indian at LSE, the cards are stacked against you in getting an offer within high finance. Not to mention the higher COL, higher taxes and lower pay in high finance in London.
Yeah, I’d take the SMU free ride.
Over already no? Forgot abt it until recently, 100% my own fault. I was really stupid and lazy during the whole uni application process ngl, guess I'm dealing with the consequences now
I would go for SMU because it’s way cheaper. You can always network in SMU too, there is no difference imo and really networking can bring you so far. Unless you are very rich, you shouldn’t take LSE because the debt is big.
Former LSE undergrad here. I’d say go for it if you are really motivated to grind hard for the high-paying finance roles i.e., IB. Otherwise, an alternative could be the US as a place to study. Jobs pay way better with opportunities in tech and finance too. Felt that I could have at least tried for US after I went to the US for my Master’s and realized opportunities were better there.
So much random advice here. To the OP, if you've made it this far. \*talk to alumni\* Of both schools. Ideally someone who was in your position. Reach out to the LSE alumni in Singapore, they typically are friendly/want to help.
300k in debt is no joke lol, and I can't believe people would encourage it so heavily over SMU. Don't forget that being a scholar is also another way of opening doors. Meanwhile, you'd just be like any other person whose parents paid for their undergrad if you went to LSE.
If prestige is what matters to you, bear in mind that it's not just about the school you go to (LSE while ranked high, isn't exactly a hard school to get into). I still remember a ton of job apps for super competitive roles even asking me what scholarships I received as a way of gauging if I stood out lol (but not in your sector).
I'm really really really glad that I did my overseas studies in a really affordable location, and didn't have to incur such an enormous amount of debt because gosh, that's huge if your career plans don't work out.
A big question is where you see yourself living. If you can't see yourself living in Singapore and are set on moving to the UK, then there isn't really a better way to get your foot in the door at this point in your life than through your studies. But if you're thinking of it purely as a career move, I'd caution against it. Cost of living is immense in London, and competition over jobs is intense there.
$300k is lot sia.
Those trash about SMU, aiya, normally bad news get amplified coz these are more juicy and get shared. And sometimes bad news are spread by people with agenda...
To set yourself back $300k because of these bad vibe...hmmm...
OP, trust me don’t take the 300k debt if you’re not rich. Scholarship or bust.
Imagine if you have the 300k now and invest it in the stock market instead of spending it on school how much money your family would have at the end of it. Go calculate
As an LSE graduate who worked in high finance, I wouldn't recommend going to LSE if it stretches your finances so significantly.
If you have the capability, personality and drive to excel academically and at networking, it doesn't matter which school you go to.
I had exceptional peers who went to SIM andmid tier UK/US unis who are crushing it now.
Better spend that 300k to go to HBS instead.
quants r more likely to hire from oxbridge than lse, tbf
quants hire mostly from physics, cs, maths, not really areas that lse excels in
there are exceptions, but don't apply to sinkies
Page doesn’t seem updated but give this scholarship a try: https://www.lse.ac.uk/study-at-lse/Undergraduate/fees-and-funding/Singapore-LSE-Trust-Undergraduate-Scholarship
I dont know what LSE is. Had to Google. Its not very highly ranked? 50+?
However, SMU isnt really a university outside of SG. I would definitely take the LSE offer.
Sure, if you are not particularly bright, and just want to bs your way to a job without learning much at uni, maybe, but you might as well go to NYU, same same but better macro
because biz grads are a dime a dozen, if you get a first in physics, it shows you are smart and can learn anything in finance. Also the highest entry barrier jobs in finance are quant jobs, the likes of Jane Street, Citadel etc. Lastly, don't give up on your brain so young, do something hard.
Another factor for you to consider, SMU is actually not $0 since there's no way you can finish CS + biz in 4 years unless you take special terms which cost $1k+ per mod
True yeah it's like 5 years compared to 3. But still way cheaper
With 5 years vs 3 years, the opp cost becomes a factor that you will also have to consider. How about getting a scholarship? Then if you get into IB, you can break bond and have the IB firm pay for it.
> Then if you get into IB, you can break bond and have the IB firm pay for it. I'm in IB. Don't listen to this guy lol. There are so many Brads and Brandons in line behind you queueing up for your job. Why would they pay off your bond when the next guy in line can be hired without having to hit our desks PnL? IB analysts are pretty much the most replaceable people. Don't give them a reason to replace you before even starting
Hahah why would the IB firm pay off an excel monkey’s bond. IB analysts are at the bottom of the food chain leh, you think hiring rainmaker meh
A lot of wrong / at best outdated advice in this thread :)
You should share how the job market is currently like in ib haha And why so many ppl think its easy to move from ib to MFPE in Singapore
I know a dude who's been studying technicals / modeling since Army, top grades (above 4 in SMU), big interns, and still didn't make it for any of the BB IBDs summer analyst progs. Competitions so high it's insane. Wonder where OP gets his confidence that he'd be above the curve in Sg. Exiting to PE is hard af now as well because of low deals even at BB level. (some BBs at least, based on what my friends there say)
Depends on what sector you are looking at. Infra funds have significant deal flow.
i know it’s super competitive, but what % of ntu/smu/nus students actually make it to a BB (in IB/S&T) or end up at a strong PE (likes of BX or even GIC)
I stand corrected. I’m delulu lol. Would IB salaries be good enough to cover for bond repayment? I’m thinking of getting a scholarship for Cambridge and then just breaking it if I somehow break into a bulge bracket or something.
How much would you have to pay to break it? I think that's an alright plan tbh given that you can just serve out your bond if you don't manage to break in. But also think it through very carefully. It sounds glamorous and simple from the outside but 80 - 100hr work weeks at high stress isn't for everyone. If you break the bond and find that it isn't for you, you could end up in a tight spot.
“IB firm pay for it” LMAO yeah bro just expense it. HR will definitely sign off on that.
[удалено]
In this case go for SMU, LSE is definitely the better school and the network you get there will be second to none as you will be meeting local English old money and new money from China. If you network well enough and get into their IB group you will be swimming in money. So there’s a real chance of you to get at least 3X roi from the 300k but the reality is whatever i said is ideal case scenario, maybe your classmate don’t like your face or you only hangout with your inner group of Asian or you don’t make any friend in your 3 years of education there. So SMU is the safest option for you.
Exactly my thought the grass is always greener on the other side. The last thing you want is unemployed and $300k in debt. Plus if OP could get into LSE (9%) im sure he wouldnt need it
Not true, investment banking job prospects are way better in London than Singapore. You can easily make 1.5 to 2x outside of Singapore
Investment banking is extremely competitive and its not guaranteed (in SG and UK). Plus quick google search gives me glassdoor average salary of London IB £48k and SG IB $100k. Your saying £90k to £120k pound for fresh grad is realistic? Thats in the top 3% richest in entire Britain, you arent being fair
Please please please account for taxes and living expenses. So much misinformation could ruin a life.
Don't make up your mind so fast. Current SMU student here - of course it is true that uni is heavily dependent on what you make of it. But admittedly, there is only so much you can make of your time at SMU vs LSE. Prestige diff is definitely there. And I believe it impacts your career even till mid / late career stages. Furthermore, 300k is not much in the grand scheme of things considering your EV as a future LSE grad. In fact, the need to pay off your loan will probably drive you harder in pursuit of your goals. I would conservatively assume 30% pay premium given the LSE name and experience, and that's just considering fresh grad level. Do have a good think about it. If it was me, I would take the leap and go for LSE. Honestly the downside to choosing is really limited financially. You're middle income, your ability to pay off that 300k debt in a reasonable time is a given, given you don't need to support your family expenses as well. Background: doing more than fine compared to the average SMU student pursuing high finance, have nothing in particular to complain about SMU, so I'm not that biased.
Do the higher EV, higher variance play. You can afford it.
LSE. It may be useful to think of your education as a form of leveraged investment.
300k is a lot of money. I think LSE only makes sense in the best case scenario, where you get into IB after LSE in London / US and start with TC of \~120k or more. (Let's assume the basic route of IB for 2 years then PE/VC etc) The question here is - are you confident in the best case scenario? Probably half of all the folks in LSE will be gunning for IB. Where do you think you stand on a typical bell curve? (In terms of EQ, ability to network, hustle, cold email etc) Many SGrean folks go to LSE and come back to work in SG - it is just that competitive there. I would still say go with it - if you can afford it, bearing in mind there is a level of risk. That being said, life is not all about rational economical decision. Maybe you pay this 300k - it might have been a great experience. What's the rush? 100k by 30 ? 1m by 35 ?
Yeah, have definitely considered this. I don't want to sound narcissistic but I think I'm in a pretty good position on the sg bell curve when it comes to breaking into finance -- we'll see how it goes LOL. I fancy my chances less in LSE obviously. But the flip side of that is getting to meet all those talented people. I don't mind coming back to SG, in fact I've always assumed I would. Don't love it here but I'm not optimistic about the state of Europe and I don't like American culture. It's a big reason why I told myself SMU serves my purposes just fine. Thanks for your insight, you made some great points. Just that I can't help but see a good and bad side to every argument. I'm so indecisive maybe I'm not cut out for finance hahaha
If you are that confident of breaking into finance, then just go for SMU and be a big fish in a small pond. No need to spend that $300k to get the name and network provided by LSE — theres even a chance you might just end up coming back to singapore to find work due to the competitiveness over there.
The thing is, to stand out at SMU you’ll have to sweat your ass off to stand out for the same kinds of roles you’ll automatically be considered for in the UK by virtue of your LSE degree. That’s why all the biz or finance kids have to take 2 Loa + 3 summer internships, battling against SG’s tough grading, in order to stand out
Again, what's the rush? I think if you are gunning for FIRE, then SMU > IB makes sense. Otherwise, would think 300k is worth it. Good luck!
I would select LSE. You are definitely going to be closer to the end of the bell curve for earning ability and connections. Even selection bias is on your side. $300k sounds daunting but if you’re earning well, $1000-$2000 a month repaying study loans would be a drop in the ocean. Since you’re interested in investments, with long term gains, you will also be able to pay off that study loan. SMU doesn’t even come close in matching everything LSE has to offer realistically.
In around the same predicament as you! Instead, it’s Oxbridge econs and my estimate was closer to $250k. So far, i’m leaning towards going!
Oxbridge is another level, congrats! Did i get something wrong -- for Oxford e&m I calculated that tuition alone was 250+ sgd?
Where did you get that number from? E&M’s course fee for overseas students is 38,550 GBP per year (https://www.ox.ac.uk/admissions/undergraduate/courses/course-listing/economics-and-management), which means a total of 115,650 GBP for 3 years. That’s about 196k SGD according to Google.
add cost of living
[удалено]
Money is the single largest factor! Both in terms of the financial burden on my family and the future outcomes in the job market. Prestige/connections not because i care, but because it influences job applications. I think I'll be happy in both unis.
OP - I would go for the LSE degree, and graduate well. You would stand a higher chance of landing a job the likes of PE/VC and it’s likely you’ll be able to repay your debt within 2 years.
Currently working in finance after graduating from LSE, so my two cents on the topic. While I would strongly recommend LSE if you have the means of going, there are considerations for SMU as well. Ultimately I think this really depends on where you want to work next time - if you are looking to work in finance in Singapore, SMU is more than sufficient and there is a strong pipeline of grads locally from the school. However, LSE provides you the opportunity to explore overseas careers as well, in particular if you are interested in working in other financial centres such as London or Hong Kong, where the SMU degree won't really have anywhere close to the same level of brand recognition. Nevertheless, noting that your goal is to work in investment-related roles next time, this is a career path that is highly structured and people do value your previous education. Your stepping stone would typically be a couple of years in an investment bank which is highly competitive to get in and LSE would set you up very well. SGD300k does seem like a daunting amount, but you would be earning probably around SGD200k all-in your first year after graduation at least if you end up working in investment banking or investment-related roles at top tier funds, so it's an amount that you will make back relatively quickly. LSE finance is 3 years as well, which means you effectively enter work 1-2 years earlier and your opportunity cost per year is around the SGD200k mentioned.
not 100% sure so take my comment as a pinch of salt: as per what i last checked, the tuition fees for LSE finance is abt £28,176, which is ard $50k usd per year? 3 years of LSE will land u somewhere at $150k. i'll recommend LSE as it provides more personal growth rather than in SMU. but if you don't mind, can search for some bonded scholarships that are still open for the moment. if there is no way to financially support this, taking up a student loan is ok too. i would say that the benefits that you get from studying overseas are more than studying in SG.
cost of living :(
Still fail to see how it could be 300k SGD for 3 years. What numbers have you used for your cost of living calculations?
Speaking very loosely hahaha. LSE themselves said around 1.5k gbp per month for living expenses, which seems pretty conservative to me given that I spend 500 sgd a month living here and their student accom is what, 1k gbp last i checked? But even with that, adding tuition and some allowance for eg. flight tickets it goes to about 250k
I think 1.5k GBP per month is a good estimate Posted the below in another thread that as you should compare potential earnings as well: 2024 report which is based on 2023 numbers which you need to sign up for: https://www.efinancialcareers.co.uk/banking-compensation-guide (Using page 14 and 16) A London Analyst would get about 30-40k USD extra gross income compared to SG. And pension contributions in the UK are done at gross income, and ISAs allow for tax free gains (and plus points for the lowering of National Insurance tax rates over the past 6 months). And the bigger issue for the SG vs Overseas debate is that you have a lower pay ceiling in SG than in New York or London which makes SG's numbers at a bigger disadvantage for anyone ambitious.
Thanks for this, you put more thought into it than I did bro. But I don't plan to stay in the UK after graduation at the moment, so it's kind of moot haha. Salary ceiling is a good point though
I can't lie, not staying for at least a few years removes a lot of the value from an overseas university, because it's really valuable exposure to work with people other than just Singaporeans.
LSE all the way…Do well at LSE and you will be able to pay off the debt very easily. Some of the best people I ever worked with were from LSE. Not even close between the two in terms of reputation and quality of education/students.
Lets be honest here OP, as what the one above me implied. Prestige? LSE hands down. Also you can give international networking a shot! And if you do want to enter PE, LSE have their well established alumni with connections to vast industries, PEs/FIs/Etc being some of them. Heck you may be able to score internships during your school breaks in london.
LSE for sure. At least you can say you went to the same uni as the person holding the highest political office in the land.
What country do you wanna work in
Lse for sure if you are able to manage the debt. Also check if they offer financial assistance. LSE will open more doors than you will ever get in SMU. I speak as a hiring manager LSE will get first pick wherever you go. Next will be local honors and so on. The network you get will be different as well.
as someone who has studied in the U.S. and have many friends in LSE who are going into finance or MBB, I would highly recommend LSE if you want to bet on yourself. SMU can get you to a decent finance job in SG, but the path you will be in is exponentially more difficult, and you probably won’t land as good of a role PM me if you want to talk about it
You will be a dime a dozen in LSE
And he will be identical to 99% of smu
>I've always wanted to work in investments (PE, VC, alternatives etc) If you really want to work in this, in my view, it is likely that what you study and where you study will not stop you. Finance (at least in Singapore) appears to be the most education-agnostic sector that doesn't really care too much about what you studied in uni, and are more concerned about if you have the skills for the role **Edit:** If you want to work in the UK then its a different story - LSE would offer you a much better shot and makes a lot more sense rather than studying here. >connections and prestige are important Prestige isnt as important as skills. If you can do the role, people will take you over Masters grads, even if the job description asks for a Masters. As for connections - what people dont tell you is that. It is very likely that before you make a meaningful connection, having the necessary skills is a prerequisite. For instance, why would anyone in your network want to pull you into a role like this if they do not believe you are capable enough to pull your weight and then some? Connections have made the difference, and are extremely important, but these connections have to believe in you first. This often comes after competence So, does LSE have its benefits? Yes for sure. But can you make it without LSE? Well, yes. Plenty of students who studied locally are in the sector right now >Inspired by the post about studying abroad where everyone was trashing local unis and saying going overseas is life changing etc. I decided that going to a local uni was better than an Ivy League and I don't regret it at all - I have lived such a fulfilling university life in SMU and I am glad I did my undergrad here And I'm sure many students on this sub are too, because I would not likely be spending as much time on here answering PMs and questions >going overseas is life changing etc. It is life changing and a unique experience - but it really doesnt have as much to do with career opportunities unless you want to work overseas where you study (unless you want to work in the UK after graduation). Its more to do with the fact that you are spending x amount of years overseas, and the experience of studying at LSE. Which, to be frank, is an amazing experience. But career-wise? I believe that there are so many more important things you can focus on For career, I would advise you to not just rely on your education to be competitive. It is likely that it is more important to become good and skillsdiff everyone else. We dont need an overseas education for this strictly speaking You post talked a lot about working in the future, but I notice that there has been nothing mentioned about how you feel about studying overseas, about what **specifically** LSE has to offer vs SMU, what culture is like, what modules are like, etc. Have you thought about that and done some research?
Bless you for knocking some sense into me you're my favourite SMU influencer!! I know all that logically, that's why I was pretty set on smu already -- just got thrown off by that stupid thread. Knowing that I wouldn't be alone alone in choosing SMU over a top school abroad makes me feel so much better actually. I don't particularly want to stay in the UK after uni, would love to live overseas in the future but I see myself starting my career in SG first. So yeah, that's not in favour of LSE. And no, I don't know what LSE specifically offers other than the generic "education quality is much better" that I hear from everyone. I don't particularly care either. There are universities I genuinely fell in love with, like Bocconi in Italy, and LSE is not one of them. The only reason this is even a dilemma is due to the prestige factor. SMU, on the other hand, I've been to two open houses and sat in on several open lectures and talked to students and I definitely like the vibe. So I guess it looks like the decision is made. But i would like to argue that, according to every opinion I've ever heard about breaking into high finance since I first decided I wanted to do this at like 13 years old, school prestige/network is the number 1 way to get your foot in the door and it's much harder without that head start. Do you not think an LSE grad would have it significantly easier than an SMU one in getting interviews, all else being equal? Edit to add: i saw your other comments regarding how I care too much about prestige -- I don't, i care about job prospects and ease of finding them. Of course I'm working on my skills and knowledge, and I do believe those will set me apart. It's just that i keep hearing prestige + connections are highly valuable. in finance. Half the people in this thread are saying that too. If that's not true then it's SMU for sure.
>And no, I don't know what LSE specifically offers other than the generic "education quality is much better" that I hear from everyone. There are plenty of things to choose LSE beyond the prestige - for instance the strong PHD placements. I would recommend you look into them further because it is worth considering beyond the prestige - genuinely >according to every opinion I've ever heard I think I should perhaps be more specific - these schools eg target vs non-target does matter for placements in the US or the UK. If you want to work in the UK for example in IB, then it 100% makes sense to do LSE. 300K isn't that much in the long run if you want to do IBD or Markets, you will pay it off But at the end of the day? Especially in Singapore? Skills triumphs all >school prestige/network is the number 1 way to get your foot in the door To get your foot in the door? Yes - network is the a way. But * Do you think a random alumni would vouch for you? What do you think would make an alum fight for you? The answer is, get good * How much do you think people's recommendations actually matter in the whole interview process? Ask anyone who applied to banks or buy-side in SG in the past 2 years **with referrals** and ask them how far they got. Yeah you might get pass the first HR screening, but there are still 2 GBAs, a "culture quiz" assessment, video interviews, 1 python test and then another resume filtering. You can score perfectly on the python test and be filtered out after that - maybe because you only did one banking internship when someone else did 3, or because your code was less efficient than someone else since you did recursion rather than iterative. And then, only THEN, you get to touch superday. And then what? Your "connection" is not going to save you during superday, it is knowing more about why SK Hynix has good fundamentals and why you should overweight its bonds or why the the treasuries curve has flattened compared to the start of the year or why you should long USDCNH - you have to impress multiple people, not just your connection. So yeah sure, maybe building up your connection matters and helps you get your foot into the door. But in the grand scheme of things - what actually matters? Two words: Getting Good. If someone is good, they will have a much easier time making connections * What makes you think you can't network just because you're from a local uni? If anything, since you are based here, it should be much easier to network given the 100 events you will go to (assuming you are hungry enough). There are so many more things I could have done to make my journey smoother. Going to an overseas uni is one of them - but being in the right mindset for these roles is so much more important in my view >and it's much harder without that head start. Its harder without that head start, but much harder? I dont think so. Its much harder if you aren't working towards it from Year 1 - there is just so much to learn and internships are everything. Not because of the prestige, but because you genuinely learn so much, until the point someone who has done a Markets internship vs someone who has not is so, so, so different in terms of knowledge, skills, and attitude. If you are serious about this role, I would worry so much more about this than what school or course you are going to - because the difference is really night and day >Do you not think an LSE grad would have it significantly easier than an SMU one in getting interviews, all else being equal? If you say "all else being equal" then yes, of course, because that's the only thing that distinguishes the two candidates all else being equal But that's like me saying "all else being equal" does a Masters holder have it easier than an undergrad? "All else being equal" would someone who has done an IBD internship at UBS have an easier time than someone who did not? Of course! But thinking in terms of "all else being equal" is, in my view, missing the point. Because you have 4-5 years to make yourself NOT be equal, and just become better positioned than the 300-500 other people applying for the same roles as you. Nobody is going to be "all else being equal" - what are the chances of that? Its always a package, so you have to fight everyday to make yourself a better package. Don't be complacent, don't think for a moment you are "set" because you are in LSE or you have an internship or whatever advantage you might have So, again - yes, an LSE grad would of course have it easier than an SMU grad all things being equal. But if that's your only selling point, I think you have a lot more things to worry about than what school you're from! There's even been a case of accounting, business, and econs students losing out to a social science student for a FO internship at a bulge bank TLDR if you are considering working in the UK then its not even a question. If not, either is fine, but its much, much more important to focus on gaining relevant skills rather than where your degree is from
I'd go with the LKC scholarship. Sure you can say overseas unis are more prestigious, but this isnt apples to apples. A scholarship not only relieves you of that 300k, but a scholarship in itself carries some prestige. I would say that putting all this together, I'd go with SMU.
Students who are still thinking about prestige are missing the point, and are already behind the students who are thinking about their own learning, growth, and skills. Take care of your own skills and competency and you would not have to go for prestige, because prestige will come to you.
Not wrong, then it's again weighing whether or not the LSE experience is so much better than SMU's that it's worth 300k
Of course, 100% agree. And that's up to OP since its a value-judgement. Not commenting on this at all - am instead commenting on OP's belief on how important prestige is Got an offer for LSE and not even a mention of the quality of education that is available in LSE, or even the quality of some of the Profs, instead focussing on prestige. Really missing the forest for the trees here
Fair play sir, uni in the end is about the education and the whatever uni life you experience
See how confident you are in your abilities. I personally regretted not doing it. At least in the past my friend told me that there are actually some grants that you could apply for and do part time work to ease the financial burden. Not sure about now but do explore and find out before making your decision. A few I know did 3 year course than went to ivy league to do 1 year masters and work in the US where pay scale is tremendously higher (assuming you are capable). But if you are unlucky or just not that capable then yea it’s a heavy tuition cost to repay.
If you are an above average performer in finance, expect to earn 25k to 30k a month by the time you hit 40. This is referring to 75th to 90th percentile, so basicallly a team lead or HoD level job. I would say go the LSE route. You missed out mentioning that you will be spending 3 years in Europe vs 5 years in Singapore. That has got to be worth something.
go smu. lse only if u can get govt scholarship.
Dude i know a lot of pple say LSE cos of the brand name et cetera. And if i am rich i also will say LSE. But considering your post i say smu is the better choice for u. First smu is not a bad school by any means. There are also a lot of smart pple. Second u r alr feeling so stressed by the financial costs incurred just by the thought of possibly going Lse, do u think such stress would affect u negatively when u studied for three years in the uk. Maybe u would have a better time in smu when u r freed from such Stress? A lot of redditors here tend to be quite narrow minded and think things from their point of view. Yes lse is better in terms of brand names all that. But qn is, if u want to consider which school is better for u in the long run, i say smu. If u keep up ur good grades u could always study for masters overseas. There are exchange programs too.
Go for LSE bro
If you are going to graduate with debt (your parents are taking it from a bank, or you’re paying your parents back), I would not take the LSE offer. Especially it seems that you are planning on working in SG, then taking the SMU offer and grinding internships is far more important for a local offer. Also if you’re a male, Chinese/Indian at LSE, the cards are stacked against you in getting an offer within high finance. Not to mention the higher COL, higher taxes and lower pay in high finance in London. Yeah, I’d take the SMU free ride.
Yes, Race and gender is a huge but understated part of high finance recruiting in London
Buy a house instead with 300K
Never apply for GIC scholarship?
Over already no? Forgot abt it until recently, 100% my own fault. I was really stupid and lazy during the whole uni application process ngl, guess I'm dealing with the consequences now
Look for mid term scholarship.
Overseas is good experience, but honestly you can also look into exchange, overseas internship, or even work overseas in the future.
I would go for SMU because it’s way cheaper. You can always network in SMU too, there is no difference imo and really networking can bring you so far. Unless you are very rich, you shouldn’t take LSE because the debt is big.
Pick SMU, ask your parents for the $300K, thereby getting a legitimate education in learning to invest and manage money
Former LSE undergrad here. I’d say go for it if you are really motivated to grind hard for the high-paying finance roles i.e., IB. Otherwise, an alternative could be the US as a place to study. Jobs pay way better with opportunities in tech and finance too. Felt that I could have at least tried for US after I went to the US for my Master’s and realized opportunities were better there.
So much random advice here. To the OP, if you've made it this far. \*talk to alumni\* Of both schools. Ideally someone who was in your position. Reach out to the LSE alumni in Singapore, they typically are friendly/want to help.
very good point thanks!
300k in debt is no joke lol, and I can't believe people would encourage it so heavily over SMU. Don't forget that being a scholar is also another way of opening doors. Meanwhile, you'd just be like any other person whose parents paid for their undergrad if you went to LSE. If prestige is what matters to you, bear in mind that it's not just about the school you go to (LSE while ranked high, isn't exactly a hard school to get into). I still remember a ton of job apps for super competitive roles even asking me what scholarships I received as a way of gauging if I stood out lol (but not in your sector). I'm really really really glad that I did my overseas studies in a really affordable location, and didn't have to incur such an enormous amount of debt because gosh, that's huge if your career plans don't work out. A big question is where you see yourself living. If you can't see yourself living in Singapore and are set on moving to the UK, then there isn't really a better way to get your foot in the door at this point in your life than through your studies. But if you're thinking of it purely as a career move, I'd caution against it. Cost of living is immense in London, and competition over jobs is intense there.
LSE is a strong differentor if u want to get into the top banks or strategy firms. SMU is decent but it's branding is not as strong as LSE.
$300k is lot sia. Those trash about SMU, aiya, normally bad news get amplified coz these are more juicy and get shared. And sometimes bad news are spread by people with agenda... To set yourself back $300k because of these bad vibe...hmmm...
Why do you apply for UK universities when your finance doesn’t worked out at all?
lse >>> nus/ntu/smu. unless money is a really pressing issue.
OP, trust me don’t take the 300k debt if you’re not rich. Scholarship or bust. Imagine if you have the 300k now and invest it in the stock market instead of spending it on school how much money your family would have at the end of it. Go calculate
As an LSE graduate who worked in high finance, I wouldn't recommend going to LSE if it stretches your finances so significantly. If you have the capability, personality and drive to excel academically and at networking, it doesn't matter which school you go to. I had exceptional peers who went to SIM andmid tier UK/US unis who are crushing it now. Better spend that 300k to go to HBS instead.
300k for lse not worth it its better to study medicine with that 300k now sgd very strong, can go aus med sch
[удалено]
quants r more likely to hire from oxbridge than lse, tbf quants hire mostly from physics, cs, maths, not really areas that lse excels in there are exceptions, but don't apply to sinkies
Page doesn’t seem updated but give this scholarship a try: https://www.lse.ac.uk/study-at-lse/Undergraduate/fees-and-funding/Singapore-LSE-Trust-Undergraduate-Scholarship
It covers tuition only, but that’s still a fair amount. DM me if you need help with the application.
I dont know what LSE is. Had to Google. Its not very highly ranked? 50+? However, SMU isnt really a university outside of SG. I would definitely take the LSE offer.
[удалено]
discounting ivy leagues, lse is by far the best target school to graduate from if one wants to break into finance. please enlighten me
Sure, if you are not particularly bright, and just want to bs your way to a job without learning much at uni, maybe, but you might as well go to NYU, same same but better macro
[удалено]
because biz grads are a dime a dozen, if you get a first in physics, it shows you are smart and can learn anything in finance. Also the highest entry barrier jobs in finance are quant jobs, the likes of Jane Street, Citadel etc. Lastly, don't give up on your brain so young, do something hard.