Cerealist

Hi! You mention work-life balance. Given that you want to break into the top 10/15 US programs, i don't think this is necessarily that dependent on which program you enter. There are certain things you just need to do, like ace most of your classes, take impressive-looking classes, impress professors via RA work and/or a paper,.. and so on. In my experience, the people who had the most work-life balance were the people who came the best prepared to the masters program. The people who were the most relaxed were typically the people who had already taken a real analysis-like course, or mastered it on their own. They took the lemma-proof style presentation of microeconomics easier, and were more easily able to deal with convergence concepts and so on in econometrics. People who also had to put in additionally long nights where those who hadn't had linear algebra before (metrics). So long story short, if you are planning on taking rigorous econ courses at your masters degree, the best way to get a work-life balance is to really know your proof-writing and (relevant) linear algebra. In terms of recognition in U.S. econ departments I'm pretty confident that LSE>UCL and LSE>Warwick, and I would guess that UCL>Warwick, thus LSE>UCL>Warwick. What you really want to do is look at the placements into US PhD programs from these masters programs. And make sure you don't confuse LSE's MSc Economics placements with LSE's EME(?) placements. Then try to get more info on the candidates that placed into top programs that you'd like to go to, and see if it's possible for you to replicate their success. For instance you might find that one or more candidate placed at a top 10 US econ program, and had a similar background with you, and took courses that you are allowed to take, and RA'd for a professor that will still be around when you are there. Now that's a good sign. Or you may find that the only candidates that placed into top US PhD programs had "routes" that you can't replicate. E.g. a student did his undergrad at Harvard, before going to LSE for a masters, really just because he wanted to live abroad for a year while he considered whether or not he wanted to do academics. But he may already have built a solid profile during his undergrad, so LSE had no treatment effect on him, and thus you won't be able to replicate his success. Now that's the ideal analysis you should perform. But it requires information not always readily available, but it's my experience that if you get the placements with names, and you contact the students they'll more often than not give you the information you want. Remember that if placements aren't name-specific, the masters program administrators may be hesitant to give out names per e-mail, so it might be better to ask over the phone or in person. When it comes to placement, having one successful placement whose success you can replicate could be more important than multiple successful placements whose profile you cannot. Best of luck to you!

I know one person with what I believe to be almost the exact profile (also international europe/latam), except maybe slightly weaker on the letter front, and no masters in economics (but masters in industrial engineering). I assume that your school is not a nationally low-ranked university. The person I know applied to various programs in top 30, and got into one US program ranked between 15 and 20. I believe his GRE quant was 168/169/170. I'd think you could replicate his success, or do somewhat better if you have strong letters. I'm sure others will give you far more conservative estimates of where you might place. My sample size is only n=1, but it's better than n=0, or estimating based on a pure american applicant sample. On that note, I'd encourage you to find current PhD students who came from similar comparable programs to your own, with respect to geography, field of study and prestige. Some people are adamant about not contact professors in advance. However, it might be a good idea to reach out to Chilean (you were Chilean right?) professors at Top20 schools asking them for advice. If you listed your profile in the same format as here, they'd be able to get a quick overview of your profile as well. I think the important thing here is to compare yourself to similar people also in terms of geography, (i.e. not U.S. applicants). I'd say apply to 10-20 (if you can afford it, and your letter writers don't mind) PhD programs in the Top 25 or so range that you'd really like to go to and ideally also places where your letter writers had some connections (e.g. Yale?). Then apply to the top 5 or so pre-PhD masters programs as well. Also look at non-UK masters like BGSE, CEMFI, Bocconi, Tilburg, Duke, NYU, Canadian programs, etc. I wish you the best of luck!

TraderJoe is probably knows better than me, but I'll offer my 2 cents: I have taken almost a full top 10 PhD finance sequence, and I barely saw a differential equation. It probably has some good signaling value, but I wouldn't prioritize PDE over say real analysis for preparation purposes. ( This is based on my sample of n=1. ) Real Analysis I would say is spot on. I'd also consider a stochastic calculus/stochastic processes class which may be very useful for CF theory. your other options (Linear algebra, prob theory, calc III, differential eq, math structures) also sound very good. Just make sure your plans are realistic. Personally, I spent a considerable amount of time on my first analysis class. It took a lot of time and energy to get into that way of thinking. I made real analysis my priority, and I barely had any mental energy left over for my other courses. Best of luck!

"former degree should be on the transcripts from the latter degree?" I think you are overgeneralizing based on some US phenomenon. If I had attended two undergrad programs in my home country, and only chose to report one of them, there would be no way that anyone could legally find that out. The second undergraduate degree would not post anything about it on my transcripts unless I chose to transfer credits, and the first school I attended wouldn't be allowed to reveal information about my previous attendance without my consent. What QuickShare would ideally avoid is listing the first undergraduate in the application forms along with it's grades etc, which may lead to risky outcomes with respect to filters/pre-screening. The main point is that QuickShare has an undergraduate degree, which is the prerequisite for attending graduate school. I also think moneyandcredit's suggested range is very pessimistic, given that we don't know how solid the recommendation letters might be. I know 4 people with similar profiles as QuickShare. They entered grad programs over the last 3 years. They attended nationally top universities for econ at non-UK/France european countries. They had far far worse math credentials, and were also interested in Macro. None of their undergrad/master programs would be ranked higher than say Top 70 internationally (IDEAS Economics Department rankings). They all only had one internationally recognized letter writer each (Top 3-4% IDEAS). None of them even considered applying to unranked schools, and they all applied to Top25. that means they applied to every school in the top 25. The four of them got offers from and are all attending a subset of: {Duke Econ, UPenn Econ, UCLA Econ, Northwestern Econ, Princeton Econ, Minnesota Econ}.. I'm trying, but based on the information set we have, I cannot see that s/he is a worse candidate than those people.

What, I really doubt that anyone would kick anyone out due to leaving out a degree. Definitely if you make up a degree, but not leave out.. However, they might wonder what you did for those three years? But if you did it part-time, you will have worked during that time period. Your poor GPA from your first undergrad, could hurt you in the algorithmic filtering process that a university might apply. So if you don't really have anything from this degree that's relevant, mention it in your CV, your SOP, or whatever, but don't include it in the actual forms. Then it won't really play a role in your application, but you will have notified them. Your age shouldn't be a problem either, I frequently run across econ/busecon/finance students who have worked for 2-3 or even 8 years and are successful applicants. If you do well on the GRE, maybe something like Q>=165, V>=150, AW >=4.0, you won't (hopefully) be screened out due to that. You say your letter-writers are well-known. Now that's not very specific. But based on your background, and stellar grades, I'd say your placement is more or less just dependent on how good your letters are: (1) how warmly they write, and (2) whether or not their names will be recognized by adcoms. (2) is decently satisfied if your recommenders every now and then publish in top international journals.. probably including the field journals. Even better if they personally know or co-author with people at schools you will be applying to -- you should just ask them about this. If say your letter-writers say they would warmly recommend you to any top 10 programs, and they know people at these programs -- or would be known by them -- I would reckon you have a solid chance of getting in to programs in the Top10 and Top 20.. if your profs are more regionally as opposed to internationally well-known, and/or their letters aren't very warm, I'd be looking at T10-T30..

BGSE: Are the placements for BGSE Comp&Market Regulation really just related to the title of the program? Or could you do their program and place into something else? Tilburg: How fixed is the curriculum? Can you take a lot of econ courses, and kind of turn it into an econ degree?

Regarding your 'concerns': 1. Yes, your school will probably be unknown, and they will probably not understand how tough your grading system is, unless you find a good way to explain it. Either in your SOP, in your CV, or by your letter-writers, or ideally all 3. 2. No shouldn't matter. They will likely just look at your most advanced ones. 3. Don't worry about publishing. You'll be just as well off finding some reputable economics professor who will vouch for your skills. Try to RA for a professor that you think will (1) write a warm letter and (2) have connections at US schools, or at least have a good track record publishing articles in known journals. 4. Ask if you can do some small scale RA work for them, then they will be able to see your skills and comment on that too. 5. Your GRE scores are really good already. If you have the spare cash, and really think you can improve your scores without having to spend much time on it, go ahead -- since you can send the score of your choice. If not, you'll probably be better off spending your time on other things. Other comments: You seem very motivated, and based on your track record you seem to be very capable. There is some positive probability that you can get into a program like NYU's, however, not having well-known recommenders and not coming from a well-known program may make it hard. Typically, internationals who get into top US programs, like NYU, have taken master degrees at known programs (BGSE MS Econ, Oxford MPhil Econ, LSE Econ or EME, Stanford, Harvard, Michigan, Duke, Toulouse, CEMFI ..) and get letters from very well-known faculty members in economics. That leads me to my main point here. Do you have the opportunity to pursue a masters degree before going onto a PhD? If you don't have large financial constraints (you might get full or partial tuition waivers, and in some cases living stipends) I would recommend doing a masters first, and trying to get into your dream school. Another option would be to get an RA position at a research institution where you would interact with top researchers. If you apply to PhDs out of your current state, I would agree with Catrina: Top10-30 for your main goal, then add some T30-50 (if you feel there is a good fit), but also some Masters programs. Or you would just aim for top placing masters programs, like the ones I mentioned, and also RA jobs, and then I would reach for the very top, including NYU. I know people who will have done very well at foreign universities, already having taken many PhD courses there during their undergrad, but then go to a reputable masters program, and take the courses again just to show that they can do as well as at a known program. These will typically be people aiming for top15 programs. Best of luck! I definitely think you can end up succeeding, either way!

I'll take a look at your profile assuming that you're looking at the Top10-Top20 US Econ range in order to stay with what I know. Math looks good, you have real analysis, matrix theory (aka linear algebra?), and probability. Equivalents of US A- or better in these courses would be important if you're thinking about the Top10/Top20 range. The fact that your math is unstructured shouldn't matter if they can just check off "Good grades in real analysis, probability and linear algebra" GPA looks good, you should probably try to find some conversion into US GPAs.. most application systems want you to input both the raw GPA and a US conversion, and make sure you don't sell yourself short. e.g. a UK 70% feels like an A- or better US GPA to me. Research also looks very good, that should def be a strong signal GRE might very well get you filtered out at most Top20 schools. Most Top10-20 profs I've talked to have said that you should have 90th (165Q) or above to be competitive. I believe this has most do to with the filtering. Other people I know say you'll be "safe" (meaning your GRE Quant won't filter you out) if you are in the 95th percentile. My GRE Q was 164. I applied to top finance and top econ programs. I was rejected by all the econ programs. This doesn't prove that they filter out a 164Q GRE, but is aligned with such an hypothesis. If you want to get into a top program, you should definitely invest some time in getting your GRE up. A solid profile is of little help if it never gets looked at by the admissions committee because you were filtered out due to a low GRE quant score. Of course your current Verbal and AWA I would think is more than sufficient for any top econ program. Letters .. Students I know who got into top 10-20 programs all had very strong letters from very recognized professors. This means that the adcoms would recognize the recommenders and know that they were good researchers, and thus respect their recommendation more. If you are at a top UK program you really have a good chance to network (RA, take classes with, supervised research ==> letters) with profs who may have good connections at other top programs. Don't waste that. If your undergrad teacher is not an active researcher, his word likely won't carry much weight. If it's very strong it might still be useful, but you should also have some reputable profs About your Top 50 US range… Before you go to far down on the US ladder, you'll probably want to consider picking a european program instead. So if you are applying to something like 25 schools, perhaps do Top15 US + Top10 Europe. What i've heard from profs is that you might get more attention on the US job market coming from a #5 European program than a #15 US program, even if the #15 US program outranks the #5 European program in a global sense. Some european programs you might want to look at: UPF, Cambridge, Oxford, LSE, LBS, Stockholm School of Economics, Toulouse, Tilburg, Bocconi... Edit: Also wanted to know whether I might be better off choosing Business PhD programs than strictly Econ? Perhaps.. (1) if you can't get your GREs up very high. I would theorize that since a typical busecon program gets 100 applicants (my sample size is like n=1, sorry) they might actually look through all applications, which means that you won't get filtered out as easily (2) funding is better (3) for some reason I feel that business school profs have better connections to europe. I've met many econ profs who had no idea where my european undergrad school even was, but most the bus school econ/finance profs knew, or had even visited there. (4) maybe the most important reason: your research interests seem to be very well aligned with what they do at bus-econ departments.

I can give you some up to date info regarding applying to Economics at the Graduate School and also the Finance program at the Business/School of Management. Most likely if it goes for Econ+Finance it probably goes for Econ+Econ too, for example NYU Econ + NYU Stern Econ. Definite No: Berkeley, Yale, Northwestern Definite Yes: Harvard*, MIT, Stanford, Chicago, NYU (even two programs within Stern is okay), Columbia Likely yes: Duke (*) Limitation for Harvard is maximum 3 applications to their Graduate School over your lifetime, and the HBS BusEcon program counts as being offered by the Graduate School in this context.

I applied to 22 schools, and my most busy recommender wrote(uploaded) letters to all 22 of them. As cheateauheart mentioned, the marginal cost of sending another letter is low. If he is "quite famous and very busy" he may just write a PDF file with a general letter, then he may have someone else (staff assistant) upload it for him onto the 22 different webportals, with broad instructions on how to rank you when faced with the typical questions like "How would you describe the candiates academic potential relative to your previous students (in percentile)?: Best ever, top 90%, top 75%, median, top 25%", of which there may be 3-4 of per webportal. Just ask him honestly, and say that you realize his time is valuable, say that you will be applying to 22 schools, and if he has the capacity to recommend you to all of them. In advance, send him an e-mail with a list of all the schools that he will have to upload to. He will receive separate e-mails from each school, and some may get lost -- so a list from your part will be helpful for him (or his staff assistant) to make sure they got all the schools. In my case, almost all my recommenders forgot 1-3 schools, so I had to remind them a time or two. One recommender was also 2 weeks late on average for the apps, but no problems materialized.

Maybe we should try to help erh instead of trying to be witty (.. and succeeding). For all we know his econ profs truly were uninspiring. In any case, I think PhDPlease's response really sums it up. Perhaps pick one (or two) prof(s) that you think will write the best letter, use him/her/them for your econ quota, and then use other profs that you feel would write better for your other letters. If your relationships with the econ profs are too weak, you should perhaps consider mending that before you apply. Even if you don't think highly of them, make it seem like you do.

I got a B in Calc IV, and a B in PhD level probability and measure theory, and I got offers from top places for finance. If you're aiming for the top 10 places a B or two won't hurt you, unless your GPA is still high and your profile displays a solid quantitative preparation. E.g. a bunch of other math courses with As, and some other technical courses with good grades. and as mktingapplicant said, take real analysis and get an A, and you're good. (it's as easy as that, haha)

Hi. I took a PhD level statistics course in Probability and Measure Theory, and the next semester a standard (T20 department) Econometrics I course. I first thought it would be a good course to prepare, but really it's almost the other way around. It was a good prep, but came with a lot of sweat. I was however extremely well prepared for my econometrics class, and it has given me a very useful vocabulary. The prereq for the course was a rigorous undergrad analysis course covering the first 7 chapters of Rudin's Mathematical Analysis. After having taken it, I regretted it since I didn't get a very good grade. But when I started Econometrics I, I realized how useful it was -- I'd more or less covered half or more of the syllabus beforehand. Also, in more theoretical seminars and in other metrics courses when someone throws out fancy words like "Lp convergence" etc, I know what they are talking about. If you are going to do applied empiricalresearch, very little, if anything of what is taught in a PT/MT course but not in a rigorous PhD metrics sequence will be directly useful to the extent that you can't pick it up on the go. But if you'd like to read and understand the theory behind your methods it will go a long way.

Hehe, that's kind of you. You'll probably have a chance to reciprocate my pushing of the red button some time in the future when I'm operating outside of my information set.

PhDPlease, everyone I know who have been to Barca absolutely loved it. I'm also pretty sure that your cost of living in barca would be considerably below that of D.C// the GT area. The UPF/BGSE PhD program is also very well recognized. I don't think many people without a preference for living in the US would choose GT > Barca for a PhD, or for a masters if they intended to do a PhD later. Note that someone on this forum with more knowledge about the BGSE program said that it was typical to do the masters over 1 year, then spend a certain amount of time working as an RA while preparing applications for PhD programs. Unless you get into and decide to go to UPF for your PhD having some extra time is advantageous.