PhD Cambridge or Warwick

[dwpp]

Dear,

Im adimitted to both programs (Warwick with-, Cam without funding) and want to work on time series.
Ww is a "full scale" 4 yr course (as in the US) whereas Cam takes only 3yrs. Cambridge has some really good people in this field, but the overall reputation of Cambridge seems to be lower (at least many people on this site argue that Warwick is better than Cam).
Warwick seems to be a "rising star", so when I would finish there the reputation of the department could have improved quite a lot.
It seems to me that Warwick accepts almost anyone, whereas Cambridge has tougher entry requirements in there PhD program. So, the fellow PhD students (=potential co-workers) should be better.

Any suggestions? Im getting really desperate

[Gecko]

if its time series, I don't see why warwick is better than cambridge, as the latter has harvey

[asianeconomist]

And Smith, and Pesaran.

[tennisboy85]

I think Warwick is more a falling star than a rising one. I hard some really bad things about their program.

[elcapitano]

If you compare the limited information that Cambridge give you about their placements with the information provided by Warwick I'd say Warwick has the edge although it's hard to tell because of the lack of timespan indicated by Cambridge - I'm assuming these are the best placements over several years. This applies especially as Cambridge's program is bigger (Warwick claim to admit about 15 students each year while Cambridge claim to award around 15 PhD's each year) and also likely to have a slightly higher quality of students.

Also, as far as I was aware, the structure of the PhD programs is identical at both Cambridge and Warwick, with both operating on the standard British 1+3 basis.

I'd still go to Cambridge though.

[asianeconomist]

This is the relevant link for Cambridge's placements:

» Staff