Help out an aspiring quant in hs
I'm a Canadian high school senior applying for university. I was initially thinking of going into investment banking for the PE exit opportunities, however, I've recently been contemplating going into quantitative finance. The top target school for quant finance in Canada is Waterloo, however, I haven't been able to find data for other target schools for quant finance, only for investment banking which doesn't have the best exit opportunities for it. So I'd really appreciate any insights you may have on tier-1, tier-2, and tier-3 undergraduate programs in Canada for quant finance. Thanks!
Waterloo has excellent connections in tech and finance. Likely the best options are in Ontario and Quebec like Ivey and UofT. I suggest looking for people in the role you’re interested in on Linkedin and see where they went to school.
Thanks! I'm also planning on applying to Ivey and Rotman, but they seem to be better for IB than quant finance.
You are right. Ivey and Rotman and any other business program is a no-go for Quant. Get into Waterloo CS/SE (maybe MATH) or don't rely on quant gigs from undergrad is what I'd say. Regardless, you always have the option to get into top graduate schools from any reputable school/program to land quant gigs.
get laid
i know a waterloo grad....got a job in IT at Morgan Stanley working on MBS trading software as a developer...after a few years got a job as a junior rates trader at MS...then after a few years got a job running eTrading at Citadel...and then was poached to leave Citadel to goto another firm for ~ $1 million
That sounds awesome! Do you by any chance know his major?
computer science and math
Hey my guy. For quantitative finance go to Waterloo CS/SE. Waterloo Math isn't as good but is a decent second option. After waterloo, there is no school I could recommend in Canada. But do research on the differences between quant fin and traditional finance at IB/PE/HF. Quant is a a really niche field and I wouldn't try aiming for quant if you like finance. If you are able to land quant youd basically be a mix of a data scientist + SWE guy. If you arnt able to land the very few positions in quant finance at Waterloo, then youd be stuck doing data work (which is mostly shit) or SWE (which is fine if you like CS a lot). There is a lot more to trading and I'd say fundamental HF work> quant HF and prop shops 9 times out of 10. If you like finance you can go to Ivey/Queens and get into IB/PE/HF and there are easily 10x more positions available than quant gigs from Waterloo. But hey, I might be the dumbest guy ever so don't rely on my advice but do google the things I talked about so you can see for yourself that is the truth. Btw, there can't be tiers for undergrad quants coming out of Canada due to the scale. The guys that do make it to quant not coming from waterloo are either well connected or just fucking tryhard/geniuses so no point in crediting their school. Regardless, if I were you I'd go to Ivey/Queens and get a DD in CS + HBA or CS + BCOM and just rely on BB IB as your priority but still shoot your shot for quant dev/research gigs if you really love CS. If money is what attracts you to quant I'd say look up at its pay + turnover rate + no. of seats and compare it to typical IB paths like PE/HF and you'd realize its comparatively shit for most people.
Thanks for the info! From my research, IB/PE seem to be more "qualitative" in nature, whereas quant fin, and HF as the whole sector seems to be going quantitative, is a lot more math and stats based. I will also be planning on getting an MFE, most likely at an Ivy Leage, and I know that some firms like RenTech even exclusively hire PhDs, so I'm wondering if I'd have relatively the same chance of getting a quant fin gig with an MFE as I would an IB position with an HBA or BComm from Ivey or Queen's? Thanks again!
even coming from a top MFE barely 10% of the class gets reputable quant gigs (the stats are out in the open). i think that's its ??? to bank on an MFE that costs 80-130k US$. quant is shit, the HF space isn't just quant, a quick google search tells us that its only 30% of the firms. I am 100% certain that the thing causing you to drift into specifically quant finance is the bullshit that some people spread about how quant shit is basically what rentech does.
"so I'm wondering if I'd have relatively the same chance of getting a quant fin gig with an MFE as I would an IB position with an HBA or BComm from Ivey or Queen's?" You will 100% have an easier time getting an IB gig from Ivey/Queens than getting anything decent from even a top MFE considering the ~100k you'd spend and the ceiling is really low for most quant guys. its either you make it half/fullway to a rockstar or your doing shitwork. with IB you always have the oppurtunity to just perform good by putting in the effort, hardwork is all, if you have half a brain, that is needed to get into the top bucket. from there, you can get into PE/HF/VC if you like investing that much and they can pay u a fuck ton aswell, more than quant gigs 9 times out of 10 (unless your the rockstar guy). You should also consider competition and effort into your MFE vs IB thought.
I am 100% certain about the MFE vs Ivey/Queens but the other info might be horseshit as ive never worked for a top HF and its just from what ive heard from friends at reputable shops.
Such a massive amount of bad information in this comment, i don’t even know where to start.
Sorry, what is false?
First of all, 95+% of my MFE class got what I would describe as 'reputable quant gigs,' that is either a top hedge fund (some into discretionary / not fully systematic funds, like myself), a top prop shop, or an associate+ level role in quant trading at a bank. On average, my classmates made about ~250k all in the year after the program, ranging from 150k on the low end to 400k on the high end. Some lower ranked MFE programs are cash cows, but if you have the ability to get into a top 3-5 program, that opens a ton of doors into hedge funds, prop shops, or data science roles. Obviously this isn't worth it if your goal is investment banking, because the skill set you'll learn is completely useless in that case, and it isn't that difficult to land an IB role from undergrad.
I don't know anything about Canadian universities, so I will assume that you're right on that. However, assuming you can exit from an IB role to a PE/HF/VC role is not at all a given. Making that transition is arguably more difficult than it is to land a quant role paying the same amount coming out of a top MFE (obviously, the skillsets are very different and these roles are not directly comparable). Also, even if you are top bucket at a top bank, you will absolutely make less as the 'rockstar', 99th percentile IB analyst than you would as a 75th percentile quant in your first few years. All of that being said, IB and QR/quant trading are very different roles, and the decision should come down to fit, because pay is more than good enough either way.
One thing that I will concede is that if you're part of the tiny fraction of IB analysts who eventually become a PM at a discretionary hedge fund (Tiger cub or comparable), the ceiling is much higher than it is for fully systematic PMs because you are able to attribute alpha directly to your name, which is more difficult in a fully quantitative/systematic role, where the ceiling in most roles will be in the low 7 figures without taking a risk at a multimanager fund as a PM. However, as I mentioned, there are ample opportunities to go into either a discretionary role at a firm that uses some quantitative analysis, such as most macro, fixed income, and commodities funds, from a top MFE. Trust me, because that is what I did.
Ultimately HFs all have pretty much (esp in the market neutral space) the same business model, whether it be systematic (quant) or discretionary (fundamental). It's unreasonable to say one makes strictly more than the other. The payout formula for a PM at a MM is going to be roughly the same regardless of if you're quant or not. For example, there are plenty of PMs in GQS (citadel quant) who print money, just as there are plenty of PMs in GE (fundamental equities) who do as well. Yes there are important differences (for quants, the noncompetes are longer, it's harder to secure your own ip since you write code, but you work fewer hours), but ultimately the intra-group variation will massively swamp any generic pay differences.
If you are interested in investing, you should follow the approach that you personally enjoy, and in which you think you'll have a better chance of succeeding. If you love statistical modeling and algorithms, it would be strange to pursue a discretionary investing path under the guise of higher comp (unless you love reading 10Ks even more).
Can't speak too much to MFE but certainly most quant funds will recruit out of them. Obviously most MFEs will not land a gig at a top firm, just as how most top 10-school MBAs don't land a job at a top PE firm.
"I'm currently contemplating applying to McMaster Actuarial and Financial Mathematics and Guelph Mathematical Economics for undergrad. My goal is to break into HF, quantitative finance more specifically. If you have any other programs, I'd really appreciate it if you could inform me. Also, feedback for the finance option at u of t engsci has been really mixed, so your insights on that would be really helpful as well. Thank you!"
Btw, cross posting from QuantNet, I'd say McMaster/Guelph is one of the worst choices you can make. Your goal is quant finance but do you even know what roles interest you and what the they even imply? Honestly, read up if you are that dedicated. It isn't that difficult or time consuming. Engsci at UofT is shit if you want traditional finance. It is research oriented and provides little benefit if you're trying to study finance. I just googled to check if even a single person recommended it for traditional finance and I could only find one single guy who contradicted himself in his reply like a fucking lunatic. FOR quant finance, coming from EngSci, the odds are going to be dogshit and you might just be shooting yourself in the foot as youd need to get a PhD or a masters if you aren't able to land something out of EngSci Undergrad (which has really low odds). Honestly, however much you google, in the end you'll realize that there are only three schools you should try to actually get into, UW CS/SE or Queens/Ivey. And between them, you should make your choice by researching what quant is and how it is more relatable to CS vs finance so it makes no sense comparing the programs. Make a linkedin and use their premium free trial if they still have it going on and just search up every single guy at a quant firm coming from any canadian school in the past few years (there aren't that many so you can get through it in <1 hour) and search up how many people land IB/PE/HF from Ivey/Queens vs any other school (I'll save you some time and tell you it isn't even close) and then compare what you like or if you only make decisions based on money, compare the likelihood of you making traditional finance vs quant finance and compare the pay.
Thanks for answering my post! I've done research on quant finance, and it mainly consists of using math and stats to build financial models. As I'm intrigued by both math and statistics, and a bit more "quantitative" than qualitative a person, I began to consider quant finance as a viable career pathway, but I still want to keep the IB option open.
Also, after putting in several hours of research yesterday, UW seems to be the best by far for quant finance in Canada. I'll also check out profiles on LinkedIn.
btw, MFE and most quant/finance masters are a cash cow, thats why they cost 100k$ to give international people an easy way into the US while proving shit opportunities that is perfectly fine with international students. the programs are all shit even at an ivy. btw, if you like the math part of quant, there is little math involved if you are going into a quant firm from undergrad or MFE/quant master or what not. I am a math guy aswell. the math talent shops take in are primarily PhD hires or prodigies. It is all data & coding work, trust me (just look it up). it is a sad place if you are a finance + math guy like me. if you really fucking love math aim for a PhD and get into uoft/ubc math and just try your best to get into a top PhD school. You would be extending your career 5 years longer and you might hate the abstractness and/or the research side of math you prob dont know yet. go with what you like is my best advice and the only thing ive learned so far from my uni years. if you like pure math go into uoft/ubc math and just try your best for a top PhD. If you are dead set on quant from undergrad knowing full well it is coding/data work then go to waterloo cs/se. if you like finance(which you probably like the most from what you say) get into queens/ivey. I would advise not getting an MFE even from princeton or some shit, it is for international students trying to move into the US market by getting a US education paying 100k for that.
ok my guy, cross posting again, "compared to the lifestyle and pay of pe, quant is just not worth it in pe you hit 300k easily in late 20s and 500k-1mm in 30s for pretty much a sales/relationship job without breaking a sweat" that is 100% true and exactly the point i emphasized a lot in most my comments. quant is low paying garbage jobs.
"can you hit 300k with a bachelor's after having worked in IB for a couple of years?" almost 100% of the people that stick with IB do make that much as an associate (~3-4 years) in any good IB/EB. And if you are dedicated you can easily move to PE/HF and make high 6/low 7s by your 30s like the other guy mentioned. 300-400k is the maximum most people make at top quant firms btw. + there are at least 10x more opportunities in traditional finance and you have exits unlike if you go straight into quant.
$300 - $400k is not the most people make at quant firms. In some places that's just what they pay entry level guys in quant w/ no experiences.
It all depends on how good you are and your P&L. There are seats out there you can make 7 or 8 figures in a year if you are really that good.
Pay is a lot more variable than it is for corporate finance (IB/PE, etc.)
https://chat.whatsapp.com/Bs5oNye1pJY5hjb4d4JBJZ
This is the link for a WhatsApp group of Quants. A few guys on Quora put this up. These are seasoned veterans. Quite a few professors on here too. Quality Industry relevant discussions on there. They'll guide you better I feel !!
This thread is the blind leading the blind
Too much emotion going on in this thread, mixed with an incomplete and completely one-sided/selective presentation of facts.
Hey - fellow Canadian, I graduated a couple years back and went to Waterloo. I don't have experience in PE/IB so I'll let other's comment on the PE industry, but I can give insights on Quant Finance in the US:
Good luck!
Thanks for the info!
I generally don't like appealing to ethos, but you're best off categorically ignoring a high schooler's or college student's opinion on this subject. Sadly you may miss out on some incidentally good advice, but it will filter out much worse advice in the process. You won't know enough at this point to be able to distinguish. As hinted above, the blind are leading the blind, even here. Too many kids (myself at the time included) who wish to maximize career earnings from a perspective of risk mitigation settle for chasing where the world is... rather than risk following where it's actually going.
To the extent you listen to people with experience, I would make sure to seek opinions from those who share your values. Someone who is not quantitatively adept will gush about how easy it is to make boatloads doing "only" sales, etc, or how quants don't have the human touch that will make them succeed. I guarantee RenTech/TGS/JS will often flock to the weirder people whose opinions get drowned out in a forum like this. You do want to get both sides, but the alternative should come from someone who is jaded from their personal experience in the industry, not from someone who never set foot as a quant.
You also want to make sure not to get swayed by posts from this forum (or similar sites) from a decade ago when banks were structurally different places to work. This is not a hill I will die on, but for example, I suspect that investment banking as an exit-ops value proposition for college grads has peaked. The world may change dramatically in a few years. I think it's better to just work extra hard to get the buy-side job you want immediately and go to business school if you're that desperate for some arbitrary reset. That's not an opinion you'll hear a lot from other college kids. Make an affirmative decision for that path, if you ultimately choose it.
If you like math and programming, those skills are in demand and growing. It's much easier to capitalize on quant skills than to hone them in a non-quantitative yet lucrative role, should you ever wish to transition. If you're just a person who's reasonably adequate at the high school level, you might find yourself blown out of the water when you do real quant stuff. Maybe you don't end up even becoming a quant in the end. I'm just saying to allow yourself to fall in love with math, stats, comp sci, etc. Don't rule it out just because it seems like extra work.
Regarding the MFE, there are very successful people who have came from that background. Nevertheless, my opinion is you shouldn't plan on doing it unless you need it. Either get the gig you want out of your bachelor's, or go the extra mile to get a PhD in something worth being an expert in. You can drop out partway through with a free master's anyway. As general life advice, if you ever find yourself setting artificial checkpoints in your lifepath, ask whether you can actually achieve your goals sooner. You often can.
I never networked and basically waltzed my way into every interview I wanted, given I outperformed at a good school. Unfortunately, I blew countless first round quant interviews by having my past catch up to me. Ultimately, I was good enough on paper but didn't fundamentally learn the concepts I experienced in school. The non-quant in me rationalized that none of what I was learning in school would apply to my initial non-quant approach, so when I tried going the quant route again, I was exposed. It took me years to cover my gaps that should never existed in the first place. Luckily, I've caught up. Don't be like me.
Finally, when I was in college, everyone told me that someone who could be a quant or a non-quant would likely make more money as a non-quant, if they worked harder and were likable. I wish I had known that likable, hard-working quants with passion and some political skill could make a lot, lot more than people were telling me. I took multiple quantitative majors at a top target and reasonably stand to make more than any of my peers this year. Things would've been way different if I stayed on the wrong path just because it was better for others and "easier" in a more general sense. If you want to be on the right tail, you will maximize your chance of outsized success by being a broadly talented individual entering a hot new space, or through aligning your interests and talents with your job.
Best of luck.
Thanks for the info and advice! On a bit of a side note, I'd really appreciate it if you could provide me any tips on networking and exuding "likeability".
Cumque magni velit labore dolorem. Perspiciatis accusamus maxime eveniet aperiam magni.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Enim aut in dolores eveniet deleniti voluptatem eligendi. Nihil omnis architecto minus et et maiores. Non adipisci atque qui repellendus neque quam. Aliquam minus quae blanditiis praesentium et. Aut id a aut fuga voluptatem molestias velit. Consequuntur molestiae itaque repellendus.
Dolore rerum iure qui vero iste praesentium alias. Et perspiciatis non dolore accusantium officiis.
Quia aut quo praesentium vero. Eius quaerat culpa voluptates commodi.
Deserunt minus saepe eius. Velit ratione suscipit corporis dignissimos eum. Labore excepturi ut in.