Is NUS a good option for someone targeting investment banking roles in Asia compared to HKUST or LBS?

Question

Hema A · Accepted Answer

Yes, NUS is a good option for investment banking in Asia, but it doesn&rsquo;t carry the same weight as LBS or HKUST. LBS sends a large share of grads into London IB, and HKUST is well connected with Hong Kong banks. NUS is strongest in Singapore, where the IB market is much smaller. In fact, recent employment reports show only a handful of international students enter front-office IB each year, while more go into corporate banking or asset management.
One big factor is PR. Many banks in Singapore prefer candidates who already have permanent residency, since it saves them the hassle of sponsorship. Without PR, breaking into IB is difficult unless you already have prior IB internships or strong CFA/GMAT credentials. On the flip side, if the long-term goal is Southeast Asia, NUS gives you a respected brand and access to a fast-growing finance hub, which can make the ROI worthwhile.

V Ritik · Answer

When it comes to investment banking, the choice between NUS, HKUST, and LBS depends on where you want to work.

LBS is the clear leader for London, where almost every big IB recruits directly from the school.
HKUST has strong placement in Hong Kong, especially for front-office roles, since many banks base their Asia teams there.
NUS gives access to Singapore, but the number of IB openings is limited, and most firms prefer locals or PR holders. International students who make it usually stand out with internships, CFA levels, or strong networking.
The plus side of NUS is that Singapore is growing fast in wealth management and fintech, so there are solid alternatives if IB doesn&rsquo;t work out.

So NUS is valuable if Singapore is the end goal, but for pure investment banking, HKUST and LBS open more doors.
For more details you can read this blog on "NUS MFIN"

T Ronak · Answer

NUS is a strong name in Asia, but for pure investment banking goals it doesn&rsquo;t have quite the same pull as LBS or even HKUST. LBS is closer to the big London IB market and has stronger direct recruiting pipelines into bulge-bracket banks. HKUST, on the other hand, benefits from its location in Hong Kong, which is still a major Asian hub for IB despite recent shifts.
NUS does place graduates into IB, but the numbers are small,  think a handful each year, often into mid-tier or boutique banks. Internationals also face the hurdle of Singapore&rsquo;s local preference and work visa rules. Where NUS stands out is in broader career options across Southeast Asia, with stronger outcomes in corporate banking, asset management, and consulting. If IB front-office is the only aim, HKUST or LBS offer a clearer edge.

D. Aarav · Answer

Comparing NUS, HKUST, and LBS for IB careers really comes down to geography and employer pipelines.
&bull; LBS has the most global brand power and gives access to London recruiting &mdash; salaries for analysts in London usually start around GBP 70k&ndash;90k. &bull; HKUST sits right in Hong Kong, so banks recruit heavily on campus for both IB and PE roles, with analyst packages often in the HKD 700k&ndash;900k range. &bull; NUS is respected in Asia but IB hiring in Singapore is smaller. Graduates who land IB analyst roles there typically see salaries around SGD 80k&ndash;100k, but the number of seats is far fewer compared to London or Hong Kong.
So if IB is the single goal, LBS or HKUST give better odds and higher pay potential. NUS works better if you want broader finance options in Singapore or Southeast Asia, not just IB.