Harvard Yale or Oxford?: LL.M in finance


ssyy
Hi all, I'd like to focus on financial laws and I'm wondering which school has the most strength in this area: Harvard, Yale or Oxford's Master in Law and Finance?

Thanks!
Hi all, I'd like to focus on financial laws and I'm wondering which school has the most strength in this area: Harvard, Yale or Oxford's Master in Law and Finance?

Thanks!
quote
llm1234567
quote
I think Lighthouse's comments miss the point somewhat in terms of the distinction between the BCL and MLF. The BCL - like the Yale and Harvard LLM - is a law degree. The MLF, on the other hand, is designed to integrate legal training with a rigorous - read: highly quantitative - programme in economics and finance. Ultimately, therefore, the choice between the two will very much depend on what you want to gain from the experience.

Best of luck,

Paddy
I think Lighthouse's comments miss the point somewhat in terms of the distinction between the BCL and MLF. The BCL - like the Yale and Harvard LLM - is a law degree. The MLF, on the other hand, is designed to integrate legal training with a rigorous - read: highly quantitative - programme in economics and finance. Ultimately, therefore, the choice between the two will very much depend on what you want to gain from the experience.

Best of luck,

Paddy
quote
lawmann
Paddy is absolutely right. The Oxford MLF is in a class of its own.

The article at:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4e1a4df6-f17b-11df-8609-00144feab49a,dwp_

says that among all the postgraduate courses at Oxford, the MLF attracts among the highest number of applicants per place- says John Amour, lLwells Professor of Law and Finance.

So if that statement is any indication, interest in the MLF has eclipsed the BCL.

res ipsa loquitur, isn't it?

And there is only 30 places for the MLF. Look at the statistics of the 2010/2011 cohort available at the MLF website.

For eg. only one (1) applicant for Central and Latin America will be admitted to the MLF. The admission rate for this region of the world is 3% of 3O places.

Competition for the 30 places will be intense. May the best person gets admitted to the 2011/2012 intake.

Oxford is Oxford. There is just no comparison. Only a fool will reject a place for the 2011/2012 intake.
Paddy is absolutely right. The Oxford MLF is in a class of its own.

The article at:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4e1a4df6-f17b-11df-8609-00144feab49a,dwp_

says that among all the postgraduate courses at Oxford, the MLF attracts among the highest number of applicants per place- says John Amour, lLwells Professor of Law and Finance.

So if that statement is any indication, interest in the MLF has eclipsed the BCL.

res ipsa loquitur, isn't it?

And there is only 30 places for the MLF. Look at the statistics of the 2010/2011 cohort available at the MLF website.

For eg. only one (1) applicant for Central and Latin America will be admitted to the MLF. The admission rate for this region of the world is 3% of 3O places.

Competition for the 30 places will be intense. May the best person gets admitted to the 2011/2012 intake.

Oxford is Oxford. There is just no comparison. Only a fool will reject a place for the 2011/2012 intake.
quote
mikado
Although it's hard to compare UK and US universities, I wouldn't say Harvard and Yale (and others) can't stand the comparison with Oxford...
Although it's hard to compare UK and US universities, I wouldn't say Harvard and Yale (and others) can't stand the comparison with Oxford...
quote
lawmann
You can't compare Harvard and Yale with Cambridge and Oxford.

But one thing which is beyond comparison is that Oxford is the oldest ( medieval ) university in the English speaking world.

Havard is harvard. Oxford is Oxford.

It is like comparing a chicken with a duck, isn't it? Some people like chicken. Others like duck. How to compare?
You can't compare Harvard and Yale with Cambridge and Oxford.

But one thing which is beyond comparison is that Oxford is the oldest ( medieval ) university in the English speaking world.

Havard is harvard. Oxford is Oxford.

It is like comparing a chicken with a duck, isn't it? Some people like chicken. Others like duck. How to compare?
quote
hny_flying
Oxford's MLF is very reputed (obviously) and intensely competitive ( again obviously)

In that case, you would be better off applying to Harvard, since it accepts more students. I wouldn't go to Yale for a finance degree since it will be viewed as more academic.

Ultimately, it depends on how strong you think your application is and where you would like to spend a year of your life.

All the best!
Oxford's MLF is very reputed (obviously) and intensely competitive ( again obviously)

In that case, you would be better off applying to Harvard, since it accepts more students. I wouldn't go to Yale for a finance degree since it will be viewed as more academic.

Ultimately, it depends on how strong you think your application is and where you would like to spend a year of your life.

All the best!
quote
MAB79
quote
lawmann
I agree with hny_flying.

Everything being equal, the strength of an application for the Oxford MLF will invariably depend on the quality of the LL.B and from which law school it was obtained.

So applicants from any of the 4 tiers of law schools in UK will have a distinct advantage over law schools whose ranking in UK are scrapping at the bottom of the Barrel. For international applicants, the LL.B has to be from the best law schools of the respective country in order to be competitive. For Australia, it has to be the University of Melbourne. For Hong Kong, HKU is the undisputed champion. For Singapore, it is NUS. For Thailand, Chulalongkorn University comes to mind. For New Zealand, it is either Auckland, Wellington or Otago. For Japan, Tokyo comes to mind. Universities in which Oxford has exchange agreements will have an advantage. For eg, in Germany, Oxford has exchange agreements with the private Bucerius Law School.
I agree with hny_flying.

Everything being equal, the strength of an application for the Oxford MLF will invariably depend on the quality of the LL.B and from which law school it was obtained.

So applicants from any of the 4 tiers of law schools in UK will have a distinct advantage over law schools whose ranking in UK are scrapping at the bottom of the Barrel. For international applicants, the LL.B has to be from the best law schools of the respective country in order to be competitive. For Australia, it has to be the University of Melbourne. For Hong Kong, HKU is the undisputed champion. For Singapore, it is NUS. For Thailand, Chulalongkorn University comes to mind. For New Zealand, it is either Auckland, Wellington or Otago. For Japan, Tokyo comes to mind. Universities in which Oxford has exchange agreements will have an advantage. For eg, in Germany, Oxford has exchange agreements with the private Bucerius Law School.
quote
niknihc
There is a decent amount of nonsense in this thread.

To select two:

(i) The MLF and BCL are different horses for different courses. That said, the century-old BCL had not been "eclipsed" by the brand-new MLF course. If that "eclipse" ever happens it is a few decades down the track/

(ii) As for the notion that only Australians from Melbourne, only Hong Kongers from HKU, only Germans from Bucerians etc, etc, get into Oxford to do a BCL/MLF, that is plainly and flagrantly untrue. Anyone who has spent any time in Oxford would find this a laughable notion.

"Advice" of this sort does more harm than good. If you're a potential applicant and you're reading this, ignore the above and go directly to the website of the relevant Faculty/Faculties instead.
There is a decent amount of nonsense in this thread.

To select two:

(i) The MLF and BCL are different horses for different courses. That said, the century-old BCL had not been "eclipsed" by the brand-new MLF course. If that "eclipse" ever happens it is a few decades down the track/

(ii) As for the notion that only Australians from Melbourne, only Hong Kongers from HKU, only Germans from Bucerians etc, etc, get into Oxford to do a BCL/MLF, that is plainly and flagrantly untrue. Anyone who has spent any time in Oxford would find this a laughable notion.

"Advice" of this sort does more harm than good. If you're a potential applicant and you're reading this, ignore the above and go directly to the website of the relevant Faculty/Faculties instead.
quote
AW
There is a decent amount of nonsense in this thread.

To select two:

(i) The MLF and BCL are different horses for different courses. That said, the century-old BCL had not been "eclipsed" by the brand-new MLF course. If that "eclipse" ever happens it is a few decades down the track/

(ii) As for the notion that only Australians from Melbourne, only Hong Kongers from HKU, only Germans from Bucerians etc, etc, get into Oxford to do a BCL/MLF, that is plainly and flagrantly untrue. Anyone who has spent any time in Oxford would find this a laughable notion.

"Advice" of this sort does more harm than good. If you're a potential applicant and you're reading this, ignore the above and go directly to the website of the relevant Faculty/Faculties instead.


Some advices do not reflect the whole truth. But to be fair, one has to be pretty thick to believe that only those with their LLB degrees from the best university of the country can go to the best school of another country.
<blockquote>There is a decent amount of nonsense in this thread.

To select two:

(i) The MLF and BCL are different horses for different courses. That said, the century-old BCL had not been "eclipsed" by the brand-new MLF course. If that "eclipse" ever happens it is a few decades down the track/

(ii) As for the notion that only Australians from Melbourne, only Hong Kongers from HKU, only Germans from Bucerians etc, etc, get into Oxford to do a BCL/MLF, that is plainly and flagrantly untrue. Anyone who has spent any time in Oxford would find this a laughable notion.

"Advice" of this sort does more harm than good. If you're a potential applicant and you're reading this, ignore the above and go directly to the website of the relevant Faculty/Faculties instead.</blockquote>

Some advices do not reflect the whole truth. But to be fair, one has to be pretty thick to believe that only those with their LLB degrees from the best university of the country can go to the best school of another country.
quote
niknihc
Yes, but AW, these boards are full of "advice" that is clearly from people who've never studied at the institutions about which they purport to advise, and who've got very little firsthand knowledge about them.

It's misleading and offputting.

These boards are full of people sternly and grimly warning that one will never get into Oxford (or institution x) because one lacks characteristic "a" or doesn't meet criterion "b". And, to me, a lot of it seems like ill-informed, self-serving, speculation.

I just hope it doesn't discourage people from applying. Unless application fees are prohibitively expensive, the advice should always be: apply, apply, apply!
Yes, but AW, these boards are full of "advice" that is clearly from people who've never studied at the institutions about which they purport to advise, and who've got very little firsthand knowledge about them.

It's misleading and offputting.

These boards are full of people sternly and grimly warning that one will never get into Oxford (or institution x) because one lacks characteristic "a" or doesn't meet criterion "b". And, to me, a lot of it seems like ill-informed, self-serving, speculation.

I just hope it doesn't discourage people from applying. Unless application fees are prohibitively expensive, the advice should always be: apply, apply, apply!
quote
Oldtimer
Yes, but AW, these boards are full of "advice" that is clearly from people who've never studied at the institutions about which they purport to advise, and who've got very little firsthand knowledge about them.

It's misleading and offputting.

These boards are full of people sternly and grimly warning that one will never get into Oxford (or institution x) because one lacks characteristic "a" or doesn't meet criterion "b". And, to me, a lot of it seems like ill-informed, self-serving, speculation.

I just hope it doesn't discourage people from applying. Unless application fees are prohibitively expensive, the advice should always be: apply, apply, apply!


Well said! With the caveat that occasionally people do know what they are saying ...

What is true is that you should be courageous! Remember, 100% of those who won the lottery actually PLAYED the lottery... :P
<blockquote>Yes, but AW, these boards are full of "advice" that is clearly from people who've never studied at the institutions about which they purport to advise, and who've got very little firsthand knowledge about them.

It's misleading and offputting.

These boards are full of people sternly and grimly warning that one will never get into Oxford (or institution x) because one lacks characteristic "a" or doesn't meet criterion "b". And, to me, a lot of it seems like ill-informed, self-serving, speculation.

I just hope it doesn't discourage people from applying. Unless application fees are prohibitively expensive, the advice should always be: apply, apply, apply! </blockquote>

Well said! With the caveat that occasionally people do know what they are saying ...

What is true is that you should be courageous! Remember, 100% of those who won the lottery actually PLAYED the lottery... :P
quote
roadrunner
Although it's hard to compare UK and US universities, I wouldn't say Harvard and Yale (and others) can't stand the comparison with Oxford...


That's totally wrong. Yale is the most prestigious law school in the world. The most famous Prof. in the US lecture there. In the UK Cambridge is much better than Oxford.

This is also true what the LL.M. quality concerns. It may be that the new Master in Law and Finance in Oxford will change the picture in the future. We will see.

Besides the prestige you must be aware what you expect from a LL.M. Yale is e.g leading in Consitutional Law, History of Law, Jurisprudence, whereas I would prefer Harvard, if I was more interested in practising law (in particular in an internationa law firm).
<blockquote>Although it's hard to compare UK and US universities, I wouldn't say Harvard and Yale (and others) can't stand the comparison with Oxford...</blockquote>

That's totally wrong. Yale is the most prestigious law school in the world. The most famous Prof. in the US lecture there. In the UK Cambridge is much better than Oxford.

This is also true what the LL.M. quality concerns. It may be that the new Master in Law and Finance in Oxford will change the picture in the future. We will see.

Besides the prestige you must be aware what you expect from a LL.M. Yale is e.g leading in Consitutional Law, History of Law, Jurisprudence, whereas I would prefer Harvard, if I was more interested in practising law (in particular in an internationa law firm).
quote
That's totally wrong. Yale is the most prestigious law school in the world. The most famous Prof. in the US lecture there. In the UK Cambridge is much better than Oxford.


Would be please be so kind to inform us about your source of absolute wisdom?

Thanks.
<blockquote>That's totally wrong. Yale is the most prestigious law school in the world. The most famous Prof. in the US lecture there. In the UK Cambridge is much better than Oxford.</blockquote>

Would be please be so kind to inform us about your source of absolute wisdom?

Thanks.
quote
roadrunner
That's totally wrong. Yale is the most prestigious law school in the world. The most famous Prof. in the US lecture there. In the UK Cambridge is much better than Oxford.


Would be please be so kind to inform us about your source of absolute wisdom?

Thanks.


I studied as an undergraduate Law at Cambridge University and I am now a LL.M. at Yale. Within the USA Yale is for sure considered to be the best Law School. A main reason for that is - besides the quality of the Faculty and the Faculty-student-ratio that only 200 JDs and 25 LL.M.s are accepted (in comparison: Harvard accepts approx. 700 JDs and 150 LL.M.s). If you receive an offer from Yale as an American, you would normally not reject it. This is common opinion here in the US. Moreover, as I can say from my perspective Yale is really interested in its LL.M.s, whereas in Cambridge I made the experience that LL.M.s are more a mere financial source. I would only reject an offer from Yale, if I am interested in a field, where Yale is not leading, e.g. tax.
What Oxbridge concerns, Oxford is for sure not that good in Law than Cambridge today. It is much easier to get into Oxford in Law than to get into Cambridge. The faculty in Cambridge is also better.

However, of course, the UK Law Schools are much cheaper (in Yale the most LL.M. receive a scholarship, but the amount to pay is still much higher).

You can also check all current rankings in Law about this. But, of course, the difference of all these top law schools is not that big that there could not be got reasons to reject e.g. Yale and go to Oxford. I just wanted to make clear that the opinions stated above are not consistent with the main opinion among the Law scholars.
<blockquote><blockquote>That's totally wrong. Yale is the most prestigious law school in the world. The most famous Prof. in the US lecture there. In the UK Cambridge is much better than Oxford.</blockquote>

Would be please be so kind to inform us about your source of absolute wisdom?

Thanks.</blockquote>

I studied as an undergraduate Law at Cambridge University and I am now a LL.M. at Yale. Within the USA Yale is for sure considered to be the best Law School. A main reason for that is - besides the quality of the Faculty and the Faculty-student-ratio that only 200 JDs and 25 LL.M.s are accepted (in comparison: Harvard accepts approx. 700 JDs and 150 LL.M.s). If you receive an offer from Yale as an American, you would normally not reject it. This is common opinion here in the US. Moreover, as I can say from my perspective Yale is really interested in its LL.M.s, whereas in Cambridge I made the experience that LL.M.s are more a mere financial source. I would only reject an offer from Yale, if I am interested in a field, where Yale is not leading, e.g. tax.
What Oxbridge concerns, Oxford is for sure not that good in Law than Cambridge today. It is much easier to get into Oxford in Law than to get into Cambridge. The faculty in Cambridge is also better.

However, of course, the UK Law Schools are much cheaper (in Yale the most LL.M. receive a scholarship, but the amount to pay is still much higher).

You can also check all current rankings in Law about this. But, of course, the difference of all these top law schools is not that big that there could not be got reasons to reject e.g. Yale and go to Oxford. I just wanted to make clear that the opinions stated above are not consistent with the main opinion among the Law scholars.





quote
AW
Sounds like it's opinion rather than fact. One should again treat it with caution esp those who struggle between harvard and yale or cambridge and oxford. I guess the only thing that could be said "for sure" is that they are all excellent law schools.

Sounds like it's opinion rather than fact. One should again treat it with caution esp those who struggle between harvard and yale or cambridge and oxford. I guess the only thing that could be said "for sure" is that they are all excellent law schools.









quote
What Oxbridge concerns, Oxford is for sure not that good in Law than Cambridge today. It is much easier to get into Oxford in Law than to get into Cambridge. The faculty in Cambridge is also better.


I am surprised how someone like you, having studied at top of the notch unis like Cambridge and Yale, can display an opinion (of yourself or the majority as assessed by yourself) as a fact. Your experiences are no representative survey.

For example, in European law, jurisprudence, or competition law, I would probably choose Oxford over Cambridge. And one should not forget about learning through tutorials at Oxon. Regarding company law or public international law, one would probably head for Cambridge.
<blockquote>What Oxbridge concerns, Oxford is for sure not that good in Law than Cambridge today. It is much easier to get into Oxford in Law than to get into Cambridge. The faculty in Cambridge is also better.</blockquote>

I am surprised how someone like you, having studied at top of the notch unis like Cambridge and Yale, can display an opinion (of yourself or the majority as assessed by yourself) as a fact. Your experiences are no representative survey.

For example, in European law, jurisprudence, or competition law, I would probably choose Oxford over Cambridge. And one should not forget about learning through tutorials at Oxon. Regarding company law or public international law, one would probably head for Cambridge.
quote
AW
quote
roadrunner
The difference between fact and opinion is that only the first can be proven. I tried to point out what the common opinion in the US about US Law Schools is. If you need a survey, you should check the rankings of the last years. I was not aware of this high reputation of YLS in the US before applying for a LL.M., either.

What Oxford - Cambridge concerns: Not only Oxford has tutorials, but also Cambridge (they are called there supervisions). But, as far as I know, these supervisions are not open for LL.M.s. What can be proven also is that the quality of studends is at Yale higher than in every other Law School, given the fact (!) that the numbers of enrollment are much lower. What I also know for sure is that the grade you need to get accepted in Cambridge is higher than in Oxford.

But, as I have alread conceded, there are always good reasons to accept the offer of another law school. All law schools we talk about have high standards. My point is only that Oxford is not considered to be the best address in Law any longer. The reason for that is a financial one: Harvard and Yale have much more financial resources in order to employ the best scholars. The number of courses LL.M. students can read in Yale and Harvard are much higher than in Cambridge or Oxford (check the lists on the homepages). However, if you have found a professor, who is interested in your research and who is an expert in his field of interest, it does not matter where you study.
The difference between fact and opinion is that only the first can be proven. I tried to point out what the common opinion in the US about US Law Schools is. If you need a survey, you should check the rankings of the last years. I was not aware of this high reputation of YLS in the US before applying for a LL.M., either.

What Oxford - Cambridge concerns: Not only Oxford has tutorials, but also Cambridge (they are called there supervisions). But, as far as I know, these supervisions are not open for LL.M.s. What can be proven also is that the quality of studends is at Yale higher than in every other Law School, given the fact (!) that the numbers of enrollment are much lower. What I also know for sure is that the grade you need to get accepted in Cambridge is higher than in Oxford.

But, as I have alread conceded, there are always good reasons to accept the offer of another law school. All law schools we talk about have high standards. My point is only that Oxford is not considered to be the best address in Law any longer. The reason for that is a financial one: Harvard and Yale have much more financial resources in order to employ the best scholars. The number of courses LL.M. students can read in Yale and Harvard are much higher than in Cambridge or Oxford (check the lists on the homepages). However, if you have found a professor, who is interested in your research and who is an expert in his field of interest, it does not matter where you study.
quote

Reply to Post

Related Law Schools

Cambridge, Massachusetts 931 Followers 837 Discussions
New Haven, Connecticut 271 Followers 358 Discussions
Oxford, United Kingdom 653 Followers 765 Discussions
Oxford, United Kingdom 27 Followers 39 Discussions
Cambridge, United Kingdom 596 Followers 683 Discussions

Related Articles

An In-Depth Look at Finance LL.M.s

By B. Xu on Sep 04, 2018

The LL.M. in Finance and Banking Law

By V. Wish on Jun 01, 2009

More Articles