Bank on Banking

This is definitely a handful of answers to a handful of questions that I have been asked many times over the past several weeks as we get closer to recruiting and resume drop season. How much is too much; can I round a 3.49 to a 3.5, can I round a 3.95 to a 4.0, can I round a 3.36 to a 3.5, can I calculate a minor GPA and so forth. For every general rule of thumb (when it comes to these types of questions), there is usually an exception. Thankfully, an exception does not make or break a rule, and, as such, I have put together some quick guidelines on rounding your cumulative GPA, when to use other types of GPAs (besides cumulative) and other little subtleties and ideas.

GPA Rounding – How, When and Does it Matter?

A growing number of eager and hopeful applicants have asked me about the general rule of thumb when it comes to rounding your GPA on your resume. Can they round to 1 decimal, how about 2; do they have to go all the way out to 3 decimals on their resume? In short, it doesn’t really matter all that much. When it comes to your GPA bankers are looking for those target ranges, not a specific number – the over 3.0 crowd, the over 3.3, but less than 3.5 crowd, 3.5 to 3.7(maybe 3.8) and then north of 3.8. Generally speaking, the 3.0 to 3.3 crowd is usually the toughest sell as many employers have GPA cutoffs, which could be as high as 3.3. For this reason, it is important to display your GPA as close as you can to a 3.3 (without fudging the numbers too much, of course).

Once you are over the 3.3 hurdle, the difference (as it pertains to the opinions of resume reviewers) is pretty negligible until you hit the 3.5ish zone. In this range, you are over the requirement (if there are any) and have a solid GPA – just nothing terribly impressive (of course your major also plays a factor, but this will follow in the next article). After you break through the 3.5 or so figure, it all looks the same until you hit a 3.7-3.8. Anything above a 3.5 is definitely in the ballpark and is quite an impressive GPA – no one would scoff at it, and no one would be turning you down simply because “it’s not a 4.0.” Beyond the 3.7-3.8 you reach the cream of the crop in terms of GPA, the 3.8-4.0 kids – the overachievers; those who have it, on paper, and are proud to boast it (or at least should be). Does a 3.9 GPA tell the reviewer that you will be a rockstar on the desk – absolutely not – but it tells him/her that intellectually speaking, you should be good to go (again, different majors will carry different weights).

So after all of this explanation and rankings and ranges, does it really matter – not a whole lot. In reality, once you are above a company’s cutoff mark for GPA, the rest of just gravy (very good, but not essential). A student with a 3.4 GPA, another with a 3.63 GPA and a third with a 3.92 GPA should all have the same opportunities to shine in terms of the resume reviewer giving his/her resume a good look, and fair judgment in terms of interviewing. The question now becomes: so why worry about rounding your GPA, or trying to inflate it a bit through rounding in the first place? The answer comes in 2 parts: 1) you never know which reviewer will actually be looking at your resume and although in general a tenth or a few hundredths (after passing the initial review hurdle) isn’t a huge deal, some reviewers are particularly fond of higher GPAs (especially many small boutiques), and 2) students like to really believe their the incremental hundredth of a point or two is going to make all of the different in the world, or even if it only makes a small difference, that small difference is going to be that last little push that gets the stone over the hump of the hill. How valid or realistic point 2 is, is irrelevant, what is relevant is how comfortable students are with their resume, as a whole – meaning every part of their resume ESPECIALLY their GPA since that is generally something very much in their control. Therefore, while a 3.68 vs. a 3.7 might not be much to a reviewer, if the applicant feels much more comfortable and confident with himself and his performance at a 3.7, then that difference becomes very valuable.

After all of this explanation and rambling I nearly forgot the point of the section in the first place – rounding your GPA. Digging into the numbers, it is usually perfectly acceptable to round your GPA to the nearest tenth based on conventional rounding (and sometimes even a bit of unconventional or overzealous rounding). In other words, a 3.41 should remain a 3.41 or round down to a 3.4. A 3.45 becomes a 3.5, a 3.57 becomes a 3.6, a 3.26 becomes a 3.3, a 2.974 becomes a 3.0 and so forth. Simple enough, right?

In terms of exceptions to the rule, the biggest one that comes to mind is regarding the ever-elusive 4.0. Rounding a 3.85 to a 3.9 is perfectly acceptable (in my opinion), but rounding a 3.99 (though I’ve never seen a 3.99 GPA) to a 4.0 is not. I know this may sound a bit weird to many of you, but the reason lies in the meaning behind the 4.0. A 4.0 says that your GPA is perfect – in other words, you have received an A in every class that you have ever taken without exception. Every other GPA can be achieved through multiple combinations (regardless of how few) of As, Bs, Cs, and everything in between, but there is only one way to achieve a 4.0. Therefore, if you have every received a grade that is lower than an A, you cannot possibly have a 4.0 and therefore, cannot round up to a 4.0. Other people may disagree, but for me, rounding to the nearest tenth is perfectly acceptable, except when it comes to rounding up to a 4.0. Therefore, when it comes to students who have a GPA greater than a 3.9, I usually recommend rounding to the nearest hundredth, as opposed to the nearest tenth – unless you don’t mind being dropped down to a 3.9 (or really a 3.85, since a student with a 3.85 GPA can round up to a 3.9).

Regarding other exceptions, I have given the O.K. to students who asked me whether it is alright to round a 3.44 to a 3.5 or a 3.34 to a 3.4. I know that conventional rounding rules don’t apply, but generally for GPAs, if you round to the nearest tenth, especially for major GPAs (as they aren’t just sitting on your transcript as a cumulative GPA is), fudging the numbers over a hundredth of a point isn’t a terribly big deal. To be candid, I DO NOT recommend rounding up as you see fit (regardless of what rounding rules dictate), but if you are really itching to get into that next tenth and are off by a hundredth of a point or less (as in a 3.346 rounds to a 3.4), then it’s not the worst thing you can do on your resume.

Just as there are the rounding Dos, so too are there the rounding Do Nots. Besides the rounding to a 4.0 Do Not, do not round your GPA to the nearest point, or half point or ever quarter point (yes I was asked this once). In other words, a 3.17 is not a 3.5, not a 4.0 and not a 3.25, it is either a 3.17 or a 3.2. Similarly, a 3.37 is not a 3.5, and a 2.86 is not a 3.0.

In terms of how many decimal places is too many or too few, there are two rules: 1) do not round to 3 decimal places – it is too cluttered – stick to either the nearest tenth or nearest hundredth – if you have a 3.732 it should become a 3.73 – no one will move those 2 thousandths of a point, and 2) how you round for one GPA is how you round for all GPAs. Regarding point 2, I am referring to cumulative GPA and major GPA or cumulative GPAs from different schools, etc. If you round your cumulative GPA to the nearest tenth, your major GPA, other school GPAs, etc should all be rounded to the nearest tenth. If your major GPA is rounded the nearest hundredth, all GPAs are rounded to the nearest hundredth.

Finally, we come to the question of when to use nearest tenth vs. nearest hundredth. Generally speaking, as with everything in the business world (league tables, etc), you should show your GPA to reflect the best possible you in terms of GPA. In other words, if you have a 3.97 GPA, since you shouldn’t round a 4.0, if you round to the tenths place you would go down to a 3.9 – therefore, leave your GPA rounded to the hundredths place. Conversely, a 3.453 would definitely be more attractive as a 3.5 than a 3.45.

If you are displaying a cumulative GPA and a major GPA, then it is a matter of displaying both of them in the best possible light while keeping in mind the need for consistency in rounding. If you have a 3.48 cumulative and a 3.37 major – easy decision, round up to the nearest tenth. If you have a 3.67 cumulative and a 3.82 major, then you would be rounding up for cumulative, but down for major – since cumulative GPA trumps major in terms of importance (and losing two hundredths in your major isn’t as bad as gaining a visible tenth in cumulative is good), I would round to the nearest tenth – but this one, and other like it are definitely on the judgment call list.

Selective GPAs

The selective GPA question isn’t as popular as the rounding question, but is still a pretty common one. By selective GPA I am referring to all GPAs outside of cumulative GPA – major GPA, for example. At this point your question should be – well, where’s the question. Since Major GPAs are fine to include on a resume, where is the issue? The issue arises when an applicant begins to take subtle or broad freedoms in crafting and displaying a selective GPA – think of bank league tables as an example – say the leader in M&A is Goldman Sachs – however, if you look at the leader in terms of number of deals closed you get Morgan Stanley – if you look at deals closed outside of deals less than $1 billion dollars you get another bank and, finally, if you look at deals closed less than $1 billion on the West Coast you may get yet another bank. If you manipulate the numbers enough, you can make just about any bank number 1 or any student have a 3.7 GPA or better. Unlike with bank league tables, GPAs should not be so freely manipulated if they are to have any merit or be of any value to your candidacy.

Generally speaking, the only selective GPAs I would approve of are major GPAs – if you have a dual major, for example, you can list each major GPA separately, or a combined dual major GPA. I don’t see the purpose in using a minor GPA since you usually wouldn’t take more than 3 or 4 classes that are specifically geared towards your minor. Another favorite selective GPA category is in truly “selecting” your GPA. In other words, I am often asked “can I write down my major GPA and exclude a few classes that I didn’t’ perform well in for reason X, Y, Z if I put a note in the bottom to let them know?” In short, can an applicant randomly start removing classes from their major or cumulative GPAs for any reason? The answer: no. Do not take classes out of your GPA calculation simply because you didn’t perform well in them – I don’t care what the reason is or what kind of note you include to explain the situation. You cans explain your GPA in the interview or even cover letter if you would like to, but your GPA cannot be manipulated for classes you didn’t do well in – otherwise, everyone can just put down a 3.8 or 3.9 GPA with an asterisk that says, “excludes classes that I scored lower than an A- in, since I 100% that this performance is below my ability as an intellectually outstanding student.”

Stay tuned for a fresh product coming VERY soon, and more articles on picking your college major, networking like a banker, and much more! Comments go below and emails are sent Here!