Oxford MFE vs LSE MSc Finance – Which is better for asset management roles in the UK?

Question

I’ve received admits from Oxford Saïd’s MFE and LSE’s MSc Finance. My long-term goal is to build a career in asset management, and I’m aiming to work in the UK or globally after graduation.
Here’s some context:

I’ve done a BSc in Economics & Finance from a non-target university
I have two internships — one in Equity Research and one in valuations (pharma sector)
I’ll be completing CFA Level 1 before joining either program

I’m trying to decide which degree would give me better positioning for roles in asset management,  especially in London, but also globally.
 Would love to hear thoughts from people who’ve either been through these programs or work in the industry.

V Ritik · Accepted Answer

LSE MSc Finance A lot of people assume Oxford&rsquo;s global brand automatically wins &mdash; but in London&rsquo;s buy-side hiring market, LSE often punches above its weight.
&bull; LSE MSc Finance has a strong presence in AM &mdash; think Schroders, M&G, Pictet, and even boutique long-only shops &bull; The location gives you proximity access to firms, alumni mixers, and off-cycle interview chances &bull; Recruiters already know LSE students come from finance-focused backgrounds &mdash; your CFA Level 1 adds more edge here &bull; The MSc Finance&rsquo;s asset management electives are solid &mdash; and you can tailor your CV around buy-side interests &bull; If you&rsquo;re proactive with networking, LSE gives more hands-on chances to connect with UK-based firms
Oxford shines globally, but for London-based AM roles specifically, LSE is incredibly targeted &mdash; especially if networking is a strength.
For more details you can read these  blogs on "   LSE MSc Finance" and "Oxford MFin"

B.K Sharma · Answer

For asset management roles in the UK, Oxford MFE tends to offer stronger positioning overall due to its brand strength and structured exposure to recruiters. The program is known for sending students into roles at firms like BlackRock, Fidelity, and UBS.
It has a more curated class size, which makes access to career services and alumni support more personal. The MFE&rsquo;s overlap with the economics department also helps,  you get access to research-driven electives useful for AM.
Your background ,  BSc from a non-target, CFA Level 1, and ER/valuations internships ,  would stand out more in a smaller batch size ,  like Oxford&rsquo;s, where competition is less internally intense than LSE.
LSE still has solid asset management placements, but it's more self-driven. With Oxford, there&rsquo;s a clearer support system and brand lift when applying to buy-side roles in the UK and EU.

T Mehta · Answer

For asset management in the UK, both Oxford MFE and LSE MSc Finance are strong, but they play slightly different roles. Oxford MFE gives you the global brand name that makes recruiters notice your CV, especially if you&rsquo;re coming from a non-target undergrad. It&rsquo;s one year, very intense, and people usually jump straight into buy-side or sell-side roles right after. The Oxford tag also carries weight if you ever want to move out of London later.
LSE, though, has the bigger edge in London itself. The alumni base in asset management and hedge funds is massive, and the two-year track lets you slot in a summer internship &mdash; which is huge for AM hiring. That internship window is something Oxford doesn&rsquo;t really allow, and for someone trying to break in without a target background, it can make a big difference.

V Gupta · Answer

Choosing between Oxford MFE and LSE MSc Finance isn&rsquo;t as straightforward as it looks. People in London finance know both programs well, but the way they help you break in is slightly different.
&bull; Oxford gives you a brand that opens doors globally. For AM firms outside the UK, the Oxford name might carry more weight than LSE, and recruiters see the degree as proof of solid quant skills. &bull; LSE is more practical for London-based roles. The network in the City is huge, and the location makes it easier to meet people at events or land off-cycle internships while studying. &bull; The two-year option at LSE is a game changer because you get a summer internship, and that&rsquo;s often the pipeline into AM desks. Oxford&rsquo;s one-year program doesn&rsquo;t give that breathing room. &bull; With CFA Level 1 and your internships, you&rsquo;d be competitive at both &mdash; Oxford gives global mobility, LSE gives a stronger push for London buy-side.

Divakshi Arora · Answer

Between Oxford MFE and LSE MSc Finance, asset management recruiters in the UK tend to recognize LSE more directly as a feeder program. The MSc Finance has a strong track record of placing students into buy-side roles in London, with alumni spread across BlackRock, Schroders, and Fidelity. LSE&rsquo;s career reports show that about 20&ndash;25% of graduates enter buy-side roles (asset management, hedge funds, private equity), which is higher than most UK schools. For someone targeting asset management specifically, the larger and more finance-focused alumni network at LSE can make cold outreach and referrals easier.
Oxford MFE, on the other hand, carries a globally powerful brand name, which helps significantly if long-term plans extend outside the UK. Many MFE graduates do enter investment roles, but the degree often channels students into broader finance sectors like consulting or banking first. For asset management in London, LSE offers the more direct pipeline, while Oxford boosts long-term international recognition.