Investment Banking Target Schools

This page ranks 100 US schools by the strictest placement measure we can compute: how many of their alumni hold investment banking analyst titles at 18 named top banks — the bulge brackets, elite boutiques, and leading in-between-a-banks — from the graduating classes of roughly 2015 onward. The counts come from aggregated public professional profiles via People Data Labs (pulled 2026-08-25). Columbia leads with 1,345 top-bank analysts, and every school in the target tier shows at least 521.

The headline rank blends two views of that base: two-thirds comes from a school’s top-bank analyst count and one-third from analysts per 1,000 undergraduates, using fall 2023 enrollment, so small feeder schools are not buried by pure volume. Ranks 1–15 are targets, 16–35 semi-targets, 36–60 lower semi-targets, and everything below is non-target. The broader alumni-network counts — everyone who has ever held an investment banking title anywhere — remain one toggle away and power each school’s page.

Ranked on analysts at 18 top banks, classes of roughly 2015 onward: two-thirds count, one-third per student.

Target schools

Ranks 1 through 15 are targets, and every school in this tier has placed at least 521 analysts into the 18 top banks since the classes of roughly 2015. The pipeline is proven at scale and banks arrive on campus expecting to hire, so your job is to use the machine early. Reach out to alumni your freshman and sophomore years, because at a target the competition sits in your own classrooms.

Semi-target schools

Schools ranked 16 through 35 place real numbers into top banks — at least 152 analysts each in this data — but the per-school pipeline runs thinner. Alumni will answer your emails, and the difference between getting an interview and getting skipped comes down to outreach volume. Start networking earlier than your target-school peers and treat every alumni conversation as a referral opportunity.

Lower semi-target schools

In the 36 to 60 band the pipeline still exists — every school here shows at least 92 analysts at the top banks — but it is thin enough that you have to build your own. Expect to source interviews through cold emails and off-cycle applications rather than campus recruiting, and expect the alumni you find to remember what that climb felt like.

Non-target schools

A rank below 60 puts the odds against you without ending your chances: every school on this list has placed analysts into the top banks. Plan on cold email volume that feels unreasonable and a resume built from early finance internships. The students who make it from this tier start earlier and follow up longer than everyone they are competing against.

What the data shows

Columbia is first on both legs of the strict measure

Columbia holds first place however you cut the top-bank data: 1,345 of its alumni list investment banking analyst titles alongside the 18 top banks from the classes of roughly 2015 onward, the most of any school, and spread over 9,111 undergraduates that is also the best density in the country at 147.6 analysts per 1,000 students. The nearest per-capita challenger is Washington and Lee at 146.5 — from a school of 1,898 students whose broad network ranks just #48 by size.

Princeton is the biggest correction

Princeton's broad alumni network is modest — 1,992 profiles, #23 in the country by size — but 535 of its alumni list analyst titles alongside the top banks, better than one placement for every four profiles in the network. Ranking on actual seats instead of network size lifts it fourteen places to #9. Georgetown tells a similar story at #4: its 866 top-bank analysts outrank several schools whose broader networks are larger.

Big networks do not guarantee analyst seats

NYU has the second-largest banking alumni network in the country at 5,193 profiles, yet it lands at #21 — a semi-target on this measure — because its 738 top-bank analysts spread across 29,760 undergraduates, 24.8 per 1,000. MIT sits at #19 for a different reason: a deep finance-adjacent network but 380 analysts at the named banks. UC Berkeley survives the same dilution inside the target tier at #12 on the strength of 835 analysts.

The feeder liberal arts colleges finally show up

Pure volume buried the small feeder schools; seats per student surfaces them. Hamilton climbs from #88 by network size to #48 overall on 103 top-bank analysts from 2,048 students, Davidson from #90 to #53, and Middlebury and Williams both sit comfortably in semi-target territory with 84.6 and 86.6 analysts per 1,000 undergraduates. If you attend a school like this, the absolute network is small but the per-classmate odds rival schools ranked far higher.

The job, the firms, and the pay

Investment bankers advise companies on mergers, acquisitions, and raising capital. Most people in this dataset started as analysts at the major banks. Representative firms: JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Citi, Evercore, Lazard, Centerview. See the full bank tier list.

First-year analysts at major US banks typically earn a $110k to $125k base and $150k to $200k including bonus, with pay rising quickly by level.

Pay figures are typical US ranges from public comp surveys, not from this dataset.

How we counted

Counts come from People Data Labs, which aggregates public professional profiles. The headline figure counts people who list the school in their education, have held a job title containing the phrase “investment banking analyst”, list one of 18 named top banks as an employer, and graduated in 2013 or later — the analyst classes of roughly 2015 onward. Those conditions hold on the profile rather than on one job, so we cannot confirm the analyst title was held at the named bank rather than elsewhere in the same career; read the figure as profiles matched to those banks. Each school’s total is deduplicated, so a person who lists two of the banks counts once. The title filter excludes other divisions: equity research, sales and trading, asset management, and wealth management titles never contain the phrase. Data pulled 2026-08-25.

The overall rank blends two orderings of that count: rank by top-bank analysts carries two-thirds of the weight, and rank by analysts per 1,000 undergraduates carries one-third. When two schools tie on the blended score, the one with more analysts ranks higher. The toggles above show each ordering on its own, alongside the broader alumni-network view — everyone who has ever held any investment banking title, at any firm worldwide, which is what each school page reports as its network size.

The per-student view divides each analyst count by fall 2023 total undergraduate enrollment from the NCES IPEDS Fall Enrollment dataset and reports the result per 1,000 undergraduates. The analyst count spans roughly a decade of classes, while enrollment is a current headcount. Use this as a school-size comparison. It does not measure placement for a single graduating class.

Data caveats

The counts understate reality

People Data Labs covers a subset of LinkedIn, so every absolute number here is a floor rather than a ceiling. Treat the counts as a way to compare schools against each other — the relative gaps are informative even when the absolute totals run low.

Self-reported titles miss some analysts

The headline count requires a title containing "investment banking analyst". Titles are self-reported, and plenty of bankers list themselves as just "Analyst", so they never enter the count. The filter trades some coverage for precision — it is why the numbers read as floors.

A profile can pair a title with the wrong employer

Profile histories are matched loosely: the analyst title, the bank, the school, and the graduation year can each come from a different entry in the same person’s history. Most matches are genuine analysts, but the pairing inflates counts slightly and evenly across schools.

The era is a proxy, and the bank list is finite

Graduating in 2013 or later stands in for the analyst classes of roughly 2015 onward, because start-date filters do not work reliably on profile data. And the headline only counts 18 named banks — an analyst at a boutique outside that list contributes to the school’s broader network figure but not to its headline count.

Graduate degrees count toward a school

The school match covers anyone who lists the institution in their education, which includes graduate programs. A banker who did undergrad elsewhere and an MBA at a given school counts toward that school's total, so the numbers blend undergraduate and graduate pipelines together.

Per-1,000 is an index, not a rate

The density figure divides a decade of analyst placements by a single fall 2023 enrollment snapshot, so it compares a stock built over many classes against one year's student body. Read it as a comparative index across schools rather than a literal per-student placement rate.

Frequently asked questions

What is a target school for investment banking?

A target school is one where banks concentrate their recruiting because they already fill real analyst seats from it. In this ranking, targets are the 15 schools with the strongest combination of analysts placed at 18 top banks and analysts per student. Every school in the tier has at least 521 alumni listing investment banking analyst titles alongside those banks from the classes of roughly 2015 onward, led by Columbia's 1,345.

Can I get into investment banking from a non-target school?

Yes. Every one of the 100 schools in this dataset has alumni who hold investment banking titles, including schools ranked outside the top 60. A non-target start means you replace campus recruiting with your own pipeline — heavy cold outreach backed by early internships that prove your interest is real. Expect a longer runway than your target-school peers and start earlier because of it.

How does this ranking work?

We counted aggregated public professional profiles from People Data Labs where the person lists a school in their education, has held a job title containing "investment banking analyst", worked at one of 18 named top banks, and graduated in 2013 or later — the analyst classes of roughly 2015 onward, deduplicated across banks. The headline rank weights that count at two-thirds and the same count per 1,000 undergraduates at one-third. Tiers follow the rank: 1–15 target, 16–35 semi-target, 36–60 lower semi-target, and the rest non-target.

Why does per-student strength matter?

Raw totals reward size. NYU has placed 738 analysts at the top banks — a large number in absolute terms — but spreads them across 29,760 undergraduates, while Washington and Lee's 278 come from a student body of 1,898. Per-student strength tells you how crowded the path to those seats will be from your own classroom, which is why the ranking gives it one-third of the weight and why the small feeder schools hold their ground against much larger ones.

Tier cutoffs are based on the weighted rank: 1–15 target, 16–35 semi-target, 36–60 lower semi-target, below that non-target. The per-student leg of the blend keeps a huge school from outranking a small one on sheer size alone.