They are both selective, so shouldn’t the students be able to land internships that would make them competitive for whatever? I feel like those limitations are only valid for if you follow say, a traditional path (IE the b-school with no second major or dabbling in something like advanced CS or math). In those cases, where you go matters because employers trust that some b-schools train better for some things than others. But a lot of people landing the more high tech/quantitative jobs are not finance majors or did not go to the b-school. As for this obsession of trying to get into a place like GS and high finance from the get-go, I am not sure. And this idea that you need to major in finance to get there is even more baffling. Being talented and picking up computational and legit quantitative skills along with exposure to finance via internships (this is a must as it adds the whole “networking component”) or course selection may be better unless you attend very top schools that also have elite engineering, math, CS, or econ departments (notice how these are all quantitative- and at very top schools, are very quantitative and mathematically rigorous, much more so than a finance major and basically all majors any any UG business school). I would say open ones mind to other possibilities that result in high pay. These straight and narrow paths via finance majors, with exception of those near the top of the class will likely lead to grunt work…gaining quantitative skills appears to open a wider array of options that may not be GS, but certainly pay very well coming out of college and are likely more stimulating. Going to majors/courses that build legitimate problem solving skills (especially involving math) clearly pays off. If you can take a couple of business courses in finance or double major, it would likely make you more competitive for things like GS or other types of firms that pay well.