I received admits from both these schools but can't seem to decide where to go. As a major, I am undecided between finance and consulting.

Here are the stats (I have highlighted the favorable one in the head to head):

Quantitative:

Composite Ranking (Poets & Quants): Marshall (28) vs Foster (24)

Class Size: Marshall (216) vs Foster (139)

Fees (Two years, tuition + additional program fees): Marshall ($117,700) vs Foster ($84,258)

Avg salary (inc bonus): Marshall ($116,011) vs Foster ($118,759)

Percent empl. at graduation: Marshall (55.2%) vs Foster (82.4%)

% empl. after 3 months: Marshall (80.2%) vs Foster (95.8%)

Cost of living: Marshall (LA) vs Foster (Seattle)

Qualitative: Please correct me if I am wrong in any of these

Brand name, recall: Marshall vs Foster

Depth of alumni network: Marshall vs Foster

Functional diversity of employers: Marshall vs Foster (mainly technology)

Geographic diversity of employers: Marshall vs Foster

Faculty: Marshall vs Foster

Courses: Marshall vs Foster ...more or less equal


I think you might see the conundrum. Foster is more likely to land me a higher-paying job, while USC's brand and alum network might be helpful to move to a different city later on. USC competes with Stanford, Berkeley and UCLA while Foster is probably the best in the Northwest.

Also, since I am an international applicant, does MBA brand name matter more for me in terms of getting jobs?

Any advice and/or insight is greatly appreciated. Separately, does anyone know why Foster has shot up the rankings in recent years?