Boston University vs Michigan State for finance: which is better for breaking into the field?

The biggest practical tradeoff is Boston location and access to East Coast finance opportunities versus Michigan State’s larger traditional campus network and lower-pressure path into business recruiting. For finance specifically, Boston University tends to give you better proximity to internships during the school year, especially because being in Boston makes part-time and in-semester opportunities more realistic.

BU benefits from being in a major financial and corporate market, with access to firms in Boston and easier reach to New York. That matters because finance recruiting often rewards repeated exposure: coffee chats, informational interviews, and internships during the academic year, not just summer roles.

Michigan State is not a weak option at all. Broad has strong recruiting in business fields, a loyal alumni network, and a big-school ecosystem that can open doors, especially in the Midwest. If you are organized and proactive, you can absolutely land strong finance outcomes there, but the path may rely more on structured campus recruiting, summer internships, and alumni outreach rather than frequent in-person access to firms during the semester.

For high-finance ambitions like investment banking, private equity later on, or competitive front-office roles, BU is the more advantageous starting point between these two. It is not a target school in the same way a few elite programs are, but its location and employer access make it easier to stay close to the action. For corporate finance, commercial banking, asset management, and broader business roles, both can work well.

If the question is strictly which school gives you the better shot at internships and a first finance job, I would lean Boston University. Michigan State can absolutely get you there, but BU usually offers the more direct runway into finance recruiting because of where it sits and how often that translates into real internship access.