Master of Finance - UNSW/USYD? (3 Viewers)

[pikachufkr]

Which is better for the purposes of obtaining M&A work with a leading investment bank?

UNSW has their 'Master of Finance (Investment Banking)' - http://www2.fce.unsw.edu.au/nps/servlet/portalservice?GI_ID=System.LoggedOutInheritableArea&maxWnd=_MFin_ProgramStructure

Whilst Sydney has its 'Master of Commerce - Finance' - http://www.econ.usyd.edu.au/major/63.html

Issues that I've been considering:

- The UNSW course SOUNDS better. But names aren't everything.
- Where are Australia's GOOD finance lecturers? I mean the industry leaders. Are there more at UNSW or USYD?
- Global reputation, in particular US reputation. I've generally heard that UNSW has a better Finance reputation globally - any opposing views?
- Should I even consider Macquarie's 'Master of Applied Finance'?
- I remember someone saying that the Sydney course is 1.5 years whilst the UNSW course is 1 year. Is this true?

How much work experience would be recommended for this?

Please, no replies from 1st year students.

 

[stazi]

I've completed first year and won't comment on which is better, etc. However, I will say that in many business related masters degrees at least 2 years of experience is recommended after graduation from your 'bachelor' degree.

 

[Minai]

pikachufkr - are you applying for a Masters degree this year?

 

[treason]

As someone who has unsuccessfully interviewed with a couple of IB's in the Asia-Pac region, all I can say is do an accounting master's with some finance electives.

While all the advanced subjects are great, there's no point in learning something which won't help you get a job. When you interview with IB's, all the technical questions are basic. But that's what makes it so hard, we all learn the basics in the first year and forget it by the third.

All my interviewers when i asked them what was more imporatant as an analyst have said 60% accounting - 40% finance.

The upside to doing this degree is that it shows you are committed to IBanking.

The downside is that when they see you've done this very technical degree, they might be tempted to ask you advanced finance questions. And even if they ask you the basics they would then expect you to really know it well and under pressure!!! I had one guy who kept shouting questions at me in rapid succession. After my answer, he either shouted "CORRECT" or "WRONG", then moved on with no explanation.

 

[Wolfowitz]

And even if they ask you the basics they would then expect you to really know it well and under pressure!!! I had one guy who kept shouting questions at me in rapid succession. After my answer, he either shouted "CORRECT" or "WRONG", then moved on with no explanation.

Damn those psych-pressure asians; tsktsktsk.

 

[pikachufkr]

As someone who has unsuccessfully interviewed with a couple of IB's in the Asia-Pac region, all I can say is do an accounting master's with some finance electives.

While all the advanced subjects are great, there's no point in learning something which won't help you get a job. When you interview with IB's, all the technical questions are basic. But that's what makes it so hard, we all learn the basics in the first year and forget it by the third.

All my interviewers when i asked them what was more imporatant as an analyst have said 60% accounting - 40% finance.

The upside to doing this degree is that it shows you are committed to IBanking.

Very interesting. I've never thought about doing an accounting masters. Can anyone else confirm treason's assertion that a strong accounting background is in fact more important than a finance background when entering IB?

I really want to do the Masters in Finance though. Finance is my passion. I'm not just doing the masters to enter IB. I'd probably do it without the possibility of employment after.

minai - this would be for next year. Doing my research early.

 

[ND]

Maybe it's an asia thing? In everything i've researched about the industry, i've never heard that they're looking for accounting ppl. In the US and UK (and hence australia), IBs tend to employ ppl with (in terms of masters):

MSc (math, engineering)
MBA
MFin

The masters at the SIA and Applied Finance Centre are really good (i think that they may be better than UNSW and USYD, but i'm not certain).

Definately stick with finance, as you said it's alot more interesting.

 

[Grizzly]

I really want to do the Masters in Finance though. Finance is my passion.

Likewise.

I aim to do M in Finance (or International Finance to be precise) at UNSW ...But yeh cant really tell u much about the differences atm co i havent fully looked into the masters program.

 

[§eraphim]

Maybe it's an asia thing? In everything i've researched about the industry, i've never heard that they're looking for accounting ppl. In the US and UK (and hence australia), IBs tend to employ ppl with (in terms of masters):

MSc (math, engineering)
MBA
MFin

The masters at the SIA and Applied Finance Centre are really good (i think that they may be better than UNSW and USYD, but i'm not certain).

Definately stick with finance, as you said it's alot more interesting.

MSc (Mathematical Finance, Statistics, Applied Mathematics, Physics, Computer Science)
CFA <-----------------------------

I don't think you should reject the Accounting idea. It gives you a professional qualification which can be your backdoor into corporate advisory.

 

[§eraphim]

UNSW MFin is a failure. CFA is much better - industry driven rather than research driven.

 

[§eraphim]

OMG!!! some people just love giving out incorrect information and poor advice......

Have you even done the CFA?

It is crap!

All the Schwarzer notes and the bloody text books for CFA are written by some professor in the US. Hence, its all from the point of view of the US. Not only that, those CFA text books are just the same as any other text book you buy for your Masters level Commerce/Business subjects i.e. all theoretical and very little "real world" examples. Written by some professor or other who has never stepped outside academia in their lives.

What's worse - its by correspondence! i.e. no opportunity to develop problem solving skills and interaction. In the "real world" you obviously dont work by correspondence.

At least the Masters of Finance at UNSW you get guest lecturers and industry practitioners to come in and teach. This course is industry developed and was widely consulted by the major investment banks and financial institutions having the backing of some of the major investment banks.

Get your facts straight will you.

The UNSW MFin program has been in decline for many yrs. There haven't been enough students enrolling for it be to sustained because it's just so expensive. For example, the MFin originally offered specialisations in Mathematical Finance and Quantitiative Risk Management which were later abandoned (they are offered respectively in the MStat and MActSt). Subsequent to that, many of the more mathematical subjects offered in options pricing, interest rate theory, risk management and funds management were dropped. So the MFin in its present form isn't probably what the course advisers had in mind when they were first developing the program.

I'm not gonna comment on the quality of the CFA course as it's pretty subjective. Many consider it challenging. However, I recommended it because it's been accepted by industry as the benchmark for a practical finance program. Some of the CFA reading materials have also been incorporated into the Investment and Finance stream for the FIAA Part III qualification which is testament to its popularity.

Most textbooks are written by academics with little work experience. And a lot of them are from the US. It's just a fact of life - atm the US is the primary source of financial innovation (eg. credit derivatives are just hitting Asia Pac markets). And that applies to the MFin course readings.

The point of distance learning is two-fold:
1. it's cheaper than paying for a degree
2. it promotes independent study and time management skills

Since most professional qualifications like the CA Professional Yr and FIAA Part 3 exams are similar in nature, no matter how much we yearn for the joys of classroom learning, this is the reality.

 

[pikachufkr]

I'm sort of confused now. Is the MFin @ UNSW shit? Would Sydney be better?

Take note that I'm doing the course because I LIKE finance. Not primarily because of career objectives. I'm doing it because I feel that the finance I learnt in undergrad was just too piss easy to be of any worth.

 

[ND]

The UNSW MFin program has been in decline for many yrs.
Since most professional qualifications like the CA Professional Yr and FIAA Part 3 exams are similar in nature

Except the part 3's are a billion times more difficult (or so i've heard).

 

[§eraphim]

My point was that it's better to do an industry accepted, global qualification in finance (combined with some kind of relevant work experience) rather than getting another degree.

And the MFin at UNSW is definitely better than anything offered at USyd (see tacky's rants for the general idea)

 

[phrred]

The UNSW MFin program has been in decline for many yrs. There haven't been enough students enrolling for it be to sustained because it's just so expensive. For example, the MFin originally offered specialisations in Mathematical Finance and Quantitiative Risk Management which were later abandoned (they are offered respectively in the MStat and MActSt). Subsequent to that, many of the more mathematical subjects offered in options pricing, interest rate theory, risk management and funds management were dropped. So the MFin in its present form isn't probably what the course advisers had in mind when they were first developing the program.

I'm not gonna comment on the quality of the CFA course as it's pretty subjective. Many consider it challenging. However, I recommended it because it's been accepted by industry as the benchmark for a practical finance program. Some of the CFA reading materials have also been incorporated into the Investment and Finance stream for the FIAA Part III qualification which is testament to its popularity.

Most textbooks are written by academics with little work experience. And a lot of them are from the US. It's just a fact of life - atm the US is the primary source of financial innovation (eg. credit derivatives are just hitting Asia Pac markets). And that applies to the MFin course readings.

The point of distance learning is two-fold:
1. it's cheaper than paying for a degree
2. it promotes independent study and time management skills

Since most professional qualifications like the CA Professional Yr and FIAA Part 3 exams are similar in nature, no matter how much we yearn for the joys of classroom learning, this is the reality.

didnt the UNSW MFin come out like very recently as in last 2-3 years?

 

[phrred]

Which is better for the purposes of obtaining M&A work with a leading investment bank?

UNSW has their 'Master of Finance (Investment Banking)' - http://www2.fce.unsw.edu.au/nps/servlet/portalservice?GI_ID=System.LoggedOutInheritableArea&maxWnd=_MFin_ProgramStructure

Whilst Sydney has its 'Master of Commerce - Finance' - http://www.econ.usyd.edu.au/major/63.html

Issues that I've been considering:

- The UNSW course SOUNDS better. But names aren't everything.
- Where are Australia's GOOD finance lecturers? I mean the industry leaders. Are there more at UNSW or USYD?
- Global reputation, in particular US reputation. I've generally heard that UNSW has a better Finance reputation globally - any opposing views?
- Should I even consider Macquarie's 'Master of Applied Finance'?
- I remember someone saying that the Sydney course is 1.5 years whilst the UNSW course is 1 year. Is this true?

How much work experience would be recommended for this?

Please, no replies from 1st year students.

UNSW Has a MCommerce which is 1.5 years as well

 

[§eraphim]

The fact that the program has shrunk by so much in 4 yrs alone shows that there just isn't the demand. Also, the work experience requirements were very restrictive (1 yrs); they have now been relaxed.

It's a bit ambitious to try to emaulate the LSE - Australia is hardly a source of significant financial innovation (besides LPTs and infrastructure funds)

 

[Minai]

WRONG

The MCom at UNSW has been around since 1975.

There was a major revamp to the structure of the course to include some leadership and capstone subjects as part of the core about 1.5 to 2 years ago.

Get your facts straight.

I think you've misunderstood him - he meant the MCom is 1.5 years in length.

You should get your facts right before slamming others.

 

[phrred]

I think you've misunderstood him - he meant the MCom is 1.5 years in length.

You should get your facts right before slamming others.

Thanks Minai.
Obviously the MComm at UNSW has been around for more than 1.5 years stupid

 

[phrred]

The fact that the program has shrunk by so much in 4 yrs alone shows that there just isn't the demand. Also, the work experience requirements were very restrictive (1 yrs); they have now been relaxed.

It's a bit ambitious to try to emaulate the LSE - Australia is hardly a source of significant financial innovation (besides LPTs and infrastructure funds)

How do you know it has shrunk?
Many people dont really know that the course exists, give it a few years and i bet itll b very popular. That fact, and the cost of the course would make it unattractive not the quality of the course/teaching