The MSc would get you into the same roles as new undergraduate alumni. Low risk but low reward. The MBA would get you into a better role, probably, but more work for you and more risk. However, twice the salary. Even if you have to move diagonally, into some other finance function first and later into IB, the MBA would be better. Of course an MBA with more finance content word be better, like Cranfield, Manchester or London.

[quote]The MSc would get you into the same roles as new undergraduate alumni. Low risk but low reward. The MBA would get you into a better role, probably, but more work for you and more risk. However, twice the salary. Even if you have to move diagonally, into some other finance function first and later into IB, the MBA would be better. Of course an MBA with more finance content word be better, like Cranfield, Manchester or London. [/quote]

Thanks but what risk do you mean?

With an MSc you would get a lower salary so you will find work more easily and quickly, other things being equal. With an MBA you would get a higher salary, but have to work harder to find a role and would have a higher risk of not being in work within a few months. Compare the FT rankings.

Particularly, look closely at the average salaries of the programs listed in the FT's ranking, and compare them with what you're making now. Note that the salaries listed in the FT are for graduates three years out of their degrees.