Hey guys!
I wanted to know your views between UCLA MFE and Columbia MFE. I personally am looking to get into asset management later on in my career. California has plenty of buy-side opportunities, and as the course is offered by a b-school in the area surely has some advantages. The placement rates also look very strong.
The Columbia MFE program however has an "Asset Allocation" concentration which I am very interested in. From what I see the UCLA MFE program has less flexibility.
My question is, is it worth going to Columbia MFE over UCLA MFE when my goal is to work in a buy-side firm? I would greatly appreciate your thoughts!