E=MC^2
With everything in the world becoming more tech-driven, why does Wall Street continually recruit economics and finance majors? This is a question that has had me thinking alot lately because of the sheer stupidity of this decision.
Everyone knows that banking is mostly grind-it-out, ass-kissing work with a few mathematical problems. Trading, on the other hand, involves some more mathematical analysis and brain power. With that said, if I was a recruiter for a Wall Street firm, I would only consider engineering, math and physics majors for either position. Why? Because they are without a doubt the brightest students on campus.
Yea, I know most people will say "oh well they lack social cues and are socially retarded." However, that is completely false in my book and more of a hasty generalization. My friend is an engineering major and has a 4.0 even though most of his classes have average grades that fall somewhere in the B- range. Additionally, I have a bunch of other friends that meet this criteria and are perfectly normal in social situations and it's way more of pleasure being around them then my fellow econ and finance friends.
All of the people majoring in economics and finance just talk about making it rain on Wall Street and drinking. Why would any firm want students that went drinking every weekend but had a 3.8 in finance. Honestly, a fucking monkey could get a 4.0 as a finance major. I am just starting to realize how much of joke these classes really are and wish that I could go back and study engineering or physics.
Engineering majors are far more capable of grinding it out and being successful because of their extremely long and tedious labs, intense math courses, and highly advanced problem solving skills. They are way more sociable than people think and they have the ability to learn all of the finance concepts in half the time that an econ or finance major can.
In short: Engineers can easily learn new things because their mind is trained to pick up complicated things faster and more easily. On the other hand, business majors can not learn engineering concepts as easily because of the basic courses that come before (ie. differential equations, probability, physics etc)
Also, I would rather have a highly intelligent analyst/trader who is slightly odd than some frat bro who thinks he is god's gift to earth. Those people are absolute jokes. After all, most of the truly revolutionary thinkers on Wall Street have been from quant backgrounds or difficult majors. Not Econ/Finance
(For reference: I have taken a few "business" classes at numerous schools such as MIT, Yale, Cornell and an online course through HBS. To me, they are all the same: waste of time)
but if you were really that smart would you just realize that you could do half the work major in econ and still get a job
Life isn't always about getting a job. Engineers are usually the ones that come up with successful start-ups and design new technology. Therefore, they have multiple career outlets while econ majors only have one.
so school is boring and a lot of work i can learn what i want on my own
"it is what it is and its how it gon' be" - Lupe Fiasco
I agree with most of what you, for the betterment of this country, we really need to stop losing our best and brightest to The Street...But this is WSO so GTFO :P
a couple of things.
1) it seems to me that you're implying that the smarter you are, the harder your major is. this is simply not true... some people choose to go into economics and finance because they find these fields to be interesting and relevant. i personally found macroeconomics to be far more interesting than any circuit design class i ever took. honestly, i think that anyone who is intent on being a non-quantitative trader or banker and is majoring in electrical engineering is wasting their time (this is not to bash those Engineering majors who find out very late in the game that they prefer business over engineering... this is much more understandable).
2) sure, on average engineering majors are smarter than your average finance or economics major (although, to reiterate my first point, there are some very smart econ majors and some very dumb engineering majors). you have to keep in mind that banking and non-quant trading is NOT ROCKET SCIENCE. i think there is some IQ threshold in banking where being smarter will not necessarily yield better performance on the job. for example, i'm sure someone with a 170 IQ will not be a much better investment banker than someone with a 150 IQ (these 20 IQ points will be more meaningful at lower IQs, like 135 vs 115). yes, i'm pulling these numbers out of my ass, but i stand behind my point. once a certain IQ threshold is met, OTHER factors become much more important and are better predictors of job performance than IQ points... these include SOCIAL intelligence, willingness to work in teams, communication skills, and PASSION.
i would much rather hire a guy with a 140 IQ who is passionate about banking than a guy with a 150 IQ who is so-so about banking. and considering the selectivity for banking and trading jobs (top of your class at a target school), i think it's safe to assume that those who are recruited meet this intelligence threshold.
3) for someone who is geting so defensive about the "hasty generalizations" of Engineering majors, you are awefully quick to label business/finance majors as retarded "frat bros".
--
just my two cents.
E=mc2, good will hunting, MIT math major with a 4.0 (your profile page) = you're enamored with quantitative skills and "brain power" (your words). That's fine, but a little short-sighted if you care about business in the real world.
From my (limited) experience, I've gotten the impression that most jobs in financial services is based on selling shit and doing basic analysis. TBH, the most valuable person would be someone who knows basic accounting, statistics and maybe 3 valuable foreign languages (I wish I had this).
MIT math major who is in the "Ivy League Networking" group... a little strange considering that MIT is not in the Ivy League. But I digress. It's not like this guy has been caught lying on WSO before...
Anyway, he seems like a douche. Just the way he sounds make me think I would hate being around him, let alone a client. He kind of proves the math/engineering stereotype correct, ironically.
The fact is most things in work/life don't require huge amounts of analysis, more often than not its how well you say something fairly straight forward. Sales guys are retards a lot of times, but social/speaking skills gets the sale and gets you laid on top of that too.
I go to an ivy (Finance Major) and only have my profile page the way it is because of the movie Good Will Hunting. I think it's fairly easy to figure that out.
Also, I am not saying that EVERY econ/finance major is less intelligent than an engineering method but it is definitely obvious that on average my point is valid.
My point is, engineering students are trained to think and learn a certain way that econ/bus. majors are not. If you have ever spent 20 hours doing a lab, you would understand.
Additionally, I am not saying that every econ major is a frat bro. However, many campus studies have shown that econ majors are usually at the bottom of the workload pyramid while engineers are at the top. And for some reason you people are so simple minded. Many people leave banking to go to hedge funds/PE/VC/Start-ups where actual intelligence is needed.
You are sadly mistaken if you think places like Citadel/Jane Street/D.E Shaw/Soros/Blackstone/Top VC funds even remotely similar to banking. These places actually require intelligence and most econ/finance majors are not suited for success in these places. Yes some can, but again--most people would be better off had they studied a hard science and then received an MBA later on in life.
Going in the opposite direction is basically impossible.
Doing more work in undergrad in math/sci/eng may be correlated with smarter since you learn more technical skills, problem solving skills by doing more work, and there's probably a self-selection bias for the type of ppl choosing STEM majors, but this does not necessary meaning more work in the lab means you're better qualified for banking/fiance.
If anything, a good argument could be made you're being dumb by doing more work than what's necessary to succeed. This is in addition to assuming that because econ/fiance majors aren't doing as much as you did, they're not learning other things.
Edit: saw your reply. You posted your info one minute after my post and I don't have the time to go searching for past posts to make an internet argument. My argument still stands for the most part in regards to the general concepts.
It's sad to see that you only think of this in the scope of banking. Wall Street in general means more than just banking. People tend to stay in banking for 2 years but still remain in the industry for 30 more years. Yea learning more doesn't mean you will be a better banker but you will be better suited to venture off into other areas of finance had you learned more than economics in college.
i think this whole teaches you how to think thing is crap funded by foreign language and humanities teachers to make sure they keep their jobs. Ive heard the whole learning a new language teaches you to think in a new way and the same about history but no if your smart your smart. And ive studied hard science as i was premed for a year (well i took 1 upper level science class) and i hated it. Boring and i didnt learned anything useful. If your smart enough to be sucessful it doesnt matter what you major in.
Because you don't need to be a damn engineering major to do this job...like seriously who cares how "smart" engineering kids are if all it takes is basic mathematics to be an investment banking analyst.
After getting my CFA I will gladly take a shit on an engineers face. :))
this reminds me SOOOOOO much of this thread:
http://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/why-do-banks-recruit-at-semi-targ…
why doesn't MCD hire only math, physics, and comp sci majors?
You sir, are a douche.
To be perfectly honest, I've been thoroughly unimpressed with most engineering students I've met (waterloo, u of t, etc.). I find that they are good at memorizing, and solving simple problems quickly and efficiently, but their training doesn't develop any deep creativity or abstract reasoning skills. Most engineering degrees are the bastard children of math, physics and computer science degrees.
In my experience, economics majors have been at least as impressive as engineering majors.
this. a few thoughts 1) Banking doesn't need quantitative skill. Banking doesn't need mathematics. If you can perform basic arithmetic operation, some basic accounting knowledge, EXCEL tricks, and some financial intuition, you are set on the technical part. Program like AnEx can prepare you for a banking job in a few weeks. You don't need to be smart to perform the job. You do need to be passionate for the job to survive the long hours and good with people as you will spend a lot of hours around them. Therefore, ass kissing is one of the ways to show that. 2) like MBP said, undergraduate engineering majors or econ majors are not as impressive as most people think. They memorize certain processes to solve a problem, as proofs, and logical reasoning are not a part of their curriculum. Maths and Physics people are usually smarter, however a lot of times, they have an over developed ego and they usually are not particularly good in interacting with people.
If you think quantitative skills are the key to succeeding in a career (any career, not just banking) than you're going to be in for a big surprise
"Life isn't always about getting a job. Engineers are usually the ones that come up with successful start-ups and design new technology. Therefore, they have multiple career outlets while econ majors only have one."
This is pretty close to the point. Econ majors dont have only one outlet (they probably have two or three). But engineers generally want to do something more "engineering-y" so even if Banks wanted to hire them, they're probably not all that interested in aggregate.
..........UHM, if you're a finance major, why are you making a case against yourself?
Because I am finally realizing that it was a stupid decision on my part to limit myself by choosing this major. Yes I love it and find it interesting; but, in the long run a harder degree with an econ minor would have been better.
Campus recruiting really opens your eyes to the typ eof applicants that top firms are looking for. My end goal is not IB, i actually have bigger aspirations.
In what way would it have been "better"?
Top firms are looking for interesting, intelligent, and hard working people. Sorry if you don't fit that bill.
For someone talking about how he hates hasty generalizations your OP is filled with them. My roommate is an engineering major and he is dumb as rocks. Sure he can do Calc IV and Quantum physics but he couldn't tell if a girl was sucking his dick or if she was just tasting to see the chemical composition of his penis.
Econ and finance majors are not as dumb as you think they are. And they have tangible, useful knowledge that can be used to understand things in FINANCE. There can be interesting, intelligent, hard working people in econ/finance/philosophy/quantum physics/art history. You just gotta find them.
And also, engineering majors who can solve real world problems DO NOT need to go to wall street. We lose too many bright and capable engineers to lives where they sit behind a desk and crank out powerpoint edits.
Leave finance for finance people, and engineering for engineers.
why the fuck would bankers want engineers. this doesnt even begin to make sense. jesus
Wait, hold on, you're criticizing the staffing habits of banks and you're still in college? Dude, all anyone has to do is network, interview, and get decent grades to get a job, and somtimes all that matters is who you know.....you know this. ....why are you all wound up about this???
As a chemical engineer I find this thread pretty comical. The reason engineers go to Wall Street is strictly because the lifetime earning potential for someone in high finance is substantially more than 99.9% of engineering jobs. Each major has its highs and lows in terms of people, some engineers just become aware of the finance field late in their coursework and would rather go down that road than go work an engineering job. Not a lot of engineers interested in finance or consulting at my school though FWIW
Haha I laugh at you guys who are trying to defend the finance major - it is probably the most cruise major I came across while in UG (after Comm.... MAYBE). All of my business finance friends were blacking out four nights a week and still pulling 3.6s and 3.7s. But what the OP is forgetting is that with so few spots to go around, only the best finance kids make it to the top firms, and they generally tend to be just as capable as any engineer and passionate about the subject as well, which makes a fine recipe for a great IB analyst.
This. This is the path I took (EE with no finance experience prior to senior year), and also one of the reasons why when I think of the finance major it brings back warm thoughts of high school, when you could just pull A's without breaking a sweat. I tend to agree with the OP that IN GENERAL, engineers would make for better analysts than finance bros. But when it comes to IB, we're not talking in generalities, which is why the passionate finance stud/nerd would beat out the engineering nerd in most head to head competitions, but also why it's possible for an engineer with average stats but a real interest in finance/IB (i.e. me) to break into the field. Passion and sincere interest will win the day when it comes to recruiting for finance.
(As an aside, would definitely have gone the finance route if I had known what IB was 5 years ago - much better effort-to-reward ratio)
Why would you take harder, unnecessary classes which will ultimately lower your GPA and your chances of getting into the Goldman Sachs? You sir are a fucking retard, please change your major, the world of finance does not need whiny fucks like you.
Maybe it's about the person not the degee. Recruiting is personal, and it is about the entire package. What you may consider socially well developed is certainly not the same across fields.
If you've ever done much research into the softer skills (that really aren't developed in any university course) you would know that at the elite level of nearly any industry, being brilliant is table stakes. It is expected you can work hard, and are intelligent. Being a little bit smarter up, isn't much of an advantage. Strong social skills, and being someone people actually want to be around goes a long way in the business world.
Case in Point: I have a family member who went 4.0 for his B.Eng, and Cum Laude from his M.Eng, and for all his incredible intelligence, he had to leave consulting for industry because the fit wasn't right.
If you're worried, just make sure you hit the basics in grades and courses. Know quantitative skills are your strenght, but also be interesting. Be someone the hiring manager can handle talking to in the elevator.
You come across as abrasive, and I imagine because you are upset at the world for being how it is. But I guess you have two choices, be a lone person who does something great. Or have have some of the softer skills in addition to your strenghts and be stunning on the street.
Most interviews are about fit. I'm sure it would be interesting to see the "hit" rates by major at various firms (and reasons why for dings).
not everyone is smart enough to major in math or physics. i would count myself as one of those people. i should have stuck with econ. i could have graduated summa. i fucked up in some earlier classes that set a bar on how high my GPA would ever go. and yeah, it cost me.
but you don't need to be STEM-smart to do finance, although it doesn't hurt. if you are TOO STEM-smart, it will hurt. asperger's is not an asset in finance.
Will Hunting you have made one of the worst arguments I have yet to see on this site.
First off knowing a high level of physics is about as important in the business world ask knowing how to use a tractor. It is completely useless and only proves one thing: Your a show off.
Second, maybe some people just enjoy economics and finance? Did you ever take that into consideration?
Third, Making generalizations about how smart or dumb the students in one major are compared to another makes no sense at all. Everyone is different and everyone is going to thrive in a different field of study.
An honours Economics program at my school is actually quite quantitative (Econometrics, Linear Algebra, Multivariable Calculus, Differential Equations, Mathematical Economics, Real Analysis, Mathematical Statistics, Stochastic Processes and Time-Series are all either required courses or electives that can be used towards the degree). Heck, even the economics courses after first year are mostly calculus based (I'm just a soph). Not all econ programs are swarmed with frats- my school has a 'top business program' (flooded with "Ohhh, I wanna work as an EXECUTIVE on Wall Street type of CHICKS") and most of the finance majors fear taking Econ courses as electives as it is likely to jeapordize my GPA. I realize that my school's economics dept might be an exception due to it's reputation in Econometrics (top 3) but economics is in the process of becoming a fairly quantitative discipline if it hasn't already.
Also, having taken a lot of proof based math classes as a statistics major, I can attest to the fact that most of the bright student in the class may not be 'anti-social', but they don't give a flying fuck about anything that fails to satisfy their need for intellectual masturbation.
I really think everyone is getting a bit too defensive and misunderstanding the intent of the OP. He is right to some extent. Engineers tend to be, on average, more suitable to be banking analysts than econ majors. A) We undeniably work a lot harder than econ/finance majors, and as such as used to tedious work and long hours staring at computers and papers. B) The typical engineering culture is one of precision and great attention to detail and to the person who said engineers don't learn to think abstractly, hands down, dumbest comment ever made. Unless you study engineering technology specifically, a lot of engineering is manifesting the abstract into reality.
As a matter of fact, in France, most of their bankers are engineers; graduates of the Ecole Polytechnique and the other grande ecole engineering schools. These people go on to public service, banking, etc, and it's actually expected that few of them actually become engineers.
Now, could the OP have expressed himself better? definitely. The post did come across sort of antagonistic towards finance/econ majors, to which I say, dude! don't fuck it up for us! But at the same time, you guys seem not to understand that he was merely talking about the bigger picture, beyond IB, but still relating to IB. Not necessarily that engineering major > econ/finance major
So Econ guys, Finance guys, Engineering guys, let's all just get along and divert our negative attention towards the Political Science and Art History majors :)
Labore quibusdam repudiandae odio vitae autem. Iste enim pariatur ipsam. Voluptas aliquam distinctio ratione inventore sapiente id dolore. A et quia eos perferendis et.
Itaque asperiores eum rem iure nihil omnis. Explicabo expedita qui possimus ea. Placeat excepturi pariatur vel dolorem quia. Dolores sint voluptas autem architecto nulla.
Similique ut voluptates quibusdam eligendi exercitationem amet quia. Repudiandae sed dolores et.
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...
Ut odio distinctio iure dolor omnis impedit. Autem occaecati tenetur ut dolor ex hic. Fugit unde hic est molestiae animi porro.
Doloribus dolore debitis cumque perferendis blanditiis aliquid. Accusamus unde at rem deserunt ipsum dolorem qui accusamus. Quis veniam magnam harum neque in. Totam iure dignissimos culpa nobis optio provident enim nihil.
Quia quisquam natus aperiam sit. Doloribus qui consequatur amet architecto quia est in tenetur. Numquam inventore nostrum quibusdam nemo amet.