Is it possible to break in with just an undergrad degree from a non target top 50 undergrad university(math/finance). I want to work at a legit prop shop and it seems that everyone has a masters degree (as a trader). Also, are there any skills that would help me stand out? Sorry if this is repetitive.
| +15 | Full Time Timeline | 1 | 6d | |
| +13 | Iron Ore Trading? | 12 | 4d | |
| +9 | AVP / AD Fixed Income Trader Salary | 1 | 16h | |
| +9 | Question on SA 2025 SnT timings | 1 | 3d | |
| +4 | Understanding the Yield Curve | 2 | 2d | |
| +3 | Difference in ops between Glencore and Trafigura. Commodities, path to trader, enjoyment of ops. | 1 | 16s | |
| +3 | Nomura Global Markets | 8 | 20h | |
| +3 | What NOT To DO in S&T and Banking | 3 | 22h | |
| +3 | Citi lateral hire | 1 | 4d |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
yes
S&T =/= Prop Trading, you typed one in the title and the other in the message body. First, I would understand the differences between those two (market making, where capital comes from, sales roles, etc). You can do either with an undergrad degree. There are lots of Masters levels people at my BB but also plenty of undergrad only. From what I understand, the same can be said for a lot of prop trading firms, with a larger portion of Masters perhaps.
As far as skills goes, I would master mathematical brainteasers, understand basic accounting, and have a view on the markets before starting the most important part: networking.
As SirTradesTooMuch mentioned, S&T and prop trading are two different realms. Trading at BB's will typically be sell-side (due to the Volcker rule), whereas prop trading falls under buy-side. Understand the differences and what you want to pursue.
In terms of degree, I have a slightly different opinion. I feel like some prop shops usually aren't as selective with degrees. Unless you want to go into something technical like quant trading/HFT, a bachelor's should suffice. Of course brand name helps, but I would say some shops don't care as much if you went to a target vs non target. This is just a generalization though, as some more elite shops are more selective in this matter.
For skills, I would get a better understanding of general macroeconomics, a thought process on market views. Maybe brush up on probability & statistics. Fast math used to be big in interviews, but not so much anymore (e.g. do 28x42 in your head, what's 1+9+29-37, etc). I think coding can go help a long way. VBA and Python on a basic level, maybe R, C++ depending which field you wanna get into.
Feel free to PM me with more specific questions.
Alot of People in S&T with Graduate Degrees? (Originally Posted: 12/09/2007)
Hey guys, awesome forum.
My question for you guys is: do most traders/sales/researchers/qunts/structurers/marketers(?) in S&T have graduate degrees?
I've heard the story about nearly everyone having MBAs and PhDs as well as the stories about traders that rise up with just an undergrad degree.
So, taking an informal census of those you work with, do you think most people in S&T (traders/sales especially) have grad degrees (MSc, MBA, PhD, etc) or is there still a large amount of people that are successful with BA/BS?
I believe most have undergrad degrees with possibly some quants having math etc. phds.
dont waste your money on an mba. it might even backfire.
the education fits the role: for example, if you are doing vanilla equity derivatives, a bachelors will do. otoh, if you're looking to do structured credit, you'd need a masters or phd.
you also need to look at the kind of firm you want to go to. some hfs require knowledge of programming in addition to your role.
and a large amount of people still have ba/bs.
alright, thanks for responding. I would appreciate it if jimbo/skins1/fp175/girlytrader could make a quick comment too?
Don't know about the traders, but within structuring and sales on my desk, about half have masters and several have PhDs. On the structuring team everyone has a masters or PhD.
Not all of them are the same though, some have masters in finance, some MBAs, some in sciences, some in random subjects. But in general most of the people with just bachelors are new analysts or have been in the business for a long time. At the sort of associate/vp level it seems they all pretty much have grad degrees.
are you in london or in ny fp175? I'd say in London there are many people with grad degrees. Though in NY, from my experience, it's actually different.
Yeah I'm in London.
I would say to the person who asked the original question, a masters can rarely hurt you in terms of jobs. I think the tide is starting to turn and we will see a push towards more grad degrees in S&T, particularly technical/quantitative ones. A BA/BS is a minimum standard now, but 20 years ago back office mail clerks with a high school degree could get onto the trading floor.
However, it is a lot of work and you shouldn't do one just to look good for a bank. You should do it because you enjoy the subject and want a masters for both the experience and for career goals. I did mine with a career plan in view, but I did want to do further study and have no regrets about it. There were some people who clearly weren't in it for the right reasons and a few dropped out - waste of time and money.
3 phds on my desk, out of only 7 total...
nebanker what desk is that?
Would a CFA have a similar advantage as a masters degree?
Some points:
for the US i'd say avoid a masters apart from MBA and some MFin's. You give a bad signal to the recruiters that you could not get a descent job straight from undergrad. Not to mention that many BB banks ONLY consider only people with undergrad degrees (and this has been discussed, i'd say 75% is ivy league, MIT, Duke, Chicago and other top schools. If you come from another school u'd better shoot for a Middle office/support stint first and then try to move).
With the exception of algo trading or some Fixed Income prop desks, a PhD/masters student doesn't have much more to offer than a good undergrad. In addition, as a PhD/masters student you usually get accustomed to another way of thinking: more rigorous, more formal, etc. This will rather hurt your ability to trade or communicate with the client. Of course if you are a PhD that can think both swiftly and intuitively, and be rigorous then you're on a good track ;), but very few people have this capability. However, for quant positions + structuring + strategy a Masters or a PhD is considered a plus, if not necessary, since there you need exactly these skills that a graduate degree teaches you.
For the UK i'm not sure. Though, my sense is that it must be very competitive to move to a front office position with a masters. For example i've heard this year's class of the Masters in Accounting and Finance at LSE has 180 people, Masters in Finance and Economics has 80 and Risk and Stochastics has 60 (correct me if wrong), and there are several other Masters degrees at LSE and other schools...all these people want the same Front Office positions so the competition is immense.
I see what you are saying but I think your view is theory not practice.
My analyst class had a LOT of people with masters - again, I'd say around half have masters degrees, with a few PhDs joining as quants. Remember that in continental Europe, most degrees are a combination of bachelors and masters, and the students graduate at an older age. London hires throughout the EU and certainly more than half of the European analysts in my class (I mean excluding UK) had masters.
I will repeat what I said again: NO ONE should get a masters for a job. But it is absolutely not viewed by banks as a bad thing, being trapped in one way of thinking, etc. Remember that in the UK, BAs are 3 years long; most banks prefer a 22/23 year old with a masters degree to a 21 year old with just an undergrad.
As far as the LSE goes, the majority of people on those courses are not British, and a large number of them leave to go back to their own countries, so they're not applying for these jobs. Also, despite its reputation, it is a quite academic university and many masters students pursue PhDs and academia instead of banking. Go to any bank and you will find a large number of LSE graduates holding masters degrees working across divisions. But they probably were good enough without the masters anyway, they just wanted to go for further study.
fp175, can you comment please on what Dmod is saying (paras 2, but especially 3)? You're one of the people here whose opinion I would really value.
dmod what desk are you on?
was intern (can't tell you desk on the forum, sorry) at a BB. Starting FT next summer.
From the observations I made during my SA position this past summer it is VERY varied: Some MDs I met had MBAs but were not in S&T before they pursued their MBA Quants for the most part were PHDs Structurers were mixed, many structuring desks hired analysts Some desks would NOT hire any Associates
Over all it was desk specific but overall many analysts that started in S&T are not considering getting an MBA
Hope this helps
From the observations I made during my SA position this past summer it is VERY varied: Some MDs I met had MBAs but were not in S&T before they pursued their MBA Quants for the most part were PHDs Structurers were mixed, many structuring desks hired analysts Some desks would NOT hire any Associates
Over all it was desk specific but overall many analysts that started in S&T are not considering getting an MBA
Hope this helps
Dmod you are right on spot for the LSE figures, I am at the LSE right now and the competition is reallllly intense. Almost all of the people in my program are looking for jobs in the city, apart from the Greeks who all go back home to work, or the few yanks who want to go back to the US.
fp175 you are right on again about the people who could go ahead and get into banking right away. In Europe a masters degree is the logical step after undergraduate; my family would not respect me as much if I only had a BA, a BA would be like the equivalent of a high school education in the US (I am slighlty exaggerating, but you get the gist). I slighlty disagree with you on masters students going into further academics; it might be true about the fin & econ masters, but only a small minority in the acctg & fin program actually go on to pursue further studies (although with this year's job placement the LSE might see a few more PhD applications...)
Also the average age of my program is 23.7 or something like this. The people who interviewed me were a mix, some had masters, some had PhDs, and some others had bachelors. If I recall correctly, no one had an MBA on the trading floor (I interviewed mainly with MDs in sales)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remember, you will always be a salesman, no matter how fancy your title is. - My ex girlfriend
How much advantage do you get with the MA? And do you think it'd help at all into getting a good MBA program afterwards?
Undergraduate to S&T (Originally Posted: 01/22/2010)
I am looking to major in Computer Science or (Math,Physics,Operations Research,ect.) Not sure yet but leaning towards CS.
I do not want to be actually in the IBD. But I think I would like to be in S&T. I am obviously not set on anything, but would like it to be a possible option.
My top choices are Duke and Cornell.
I was just wondering what other "target schools" that could allow my to go from engineering to S&T at a BB in NYC.
Sites like collegeconfidential tell me only Wharton,Harvard ect.
But I am not sure if what they say is true because most of them, like myseld, are in high school still.
So any other options I should add to my college list?
Thanks, and sorry if this question has been beaten to death, I have tried searching everywhere and most answers refer to IBD.
-Lookingforanswers
I mean, you want to look at the schools where banks recruit. Columbia should definitely be on your list. So should NYU, Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Wharton, MIT, and if you're willing to go international, Oxford, Cambridge, LSE and Imperial should be there as well. Other Ivies (Brown, Dartmouth) are alright, but don't place as well as the school listed above.
Stanford doesn't place that well within S&T just because it's miles from NYC, but it's still Stanford, so it's not going to hurt you either. The same goes for Cal Tech--great school, but bad S&T placement due to location (also, I'm not sure if the students there are massively interested in trading). Places like Northwestern and UChicago aren't bad either, as they place well in Chicago, and there are many prop firms and trading desks (within banks) in Chicago. If you network well, you could probably get an internship during the semester at a prop firm or bank in Chicago.
Finally, there's Houston. UTexas and Rice place exceedingly well in Houston. The only negative is that Houston only really does commodities (specifically, energy trading).
Hope this helps.
Does pay or any other factor differ from NYC to Chicago?
Also, NYU was on my list, but I was told that to be competitive there, you have to major in finance.
But I would rather major in OR/Comp. Sci./Math/Engineering/Ect, and then go into S&T.
Any thought?
If you want to do S&T (at a BB) then Chicago is rather small. Chicago has tons of prop firms, but if you want to trade for a Bank, you're going to want to be in NY (for the US) unless it's energy trading in Texas or something.
Okay thanks. What about my other question about NYU?
Don't know anything about engineering at NYU honestly. Most people I've met from there were in Stern.
Voluptatem ut est minima maxime voluptatem debitis sed. Laborum fugit ratione et molestiae repellendus est. Voluptatem aliquam dolorem est non aut. At officiis repellat eum laborum nam et aut sed.
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...
Molestias rerum aut veritatis pariatur perspiciatis ducimus aut. Quae exercitationem asperiores rem odit laboriosam. Qui est sunt voluptatum culpa aut mollitia maxime. Quia perferendis architecto quam nam neque officiis repellendus. Blanditiis in adipisci minima dolorem doloremque repellendus. Et culpa molestias et natus odio odit voluptatem. Tempora natus vel amet minus.
Fuga sint consequatur optio culpa quis. Et architecto voluptatem dignissimos ut sed vero et. Et sed qui id. Rerum voluptatum quis consequuntur aut.
Voluptas voluptatibus ratione aspernatur sed eos. Quo expedita tempora doloremque voluptate. Est quasi nostrum iure natus. Id non in necessitatibus. Eaque deserunt quaerat atque autem quod iusto.
Deleniti praesentium quos veniam voluptas id eaque perferendis. Quibusdam atque veritatis assumenda ea et laborum ullam omnis. Ducimus reiciendis atque delectus corporis aliquam. Sed facilis et molestiae et.