MS in CS vs. Applied Math. vs. MFE
As far as quantitative positions in trading/AM firms go, which of these degrees would best help one break into the industry? I could see how a masters in CS could help for landing back office work, but what about actual quant positions? Are MFEs still well-regarded?
MFEs are not well regarded by the top quant desks. if an MFE gets those jobs it is because of reasons entirely separate from the degree.
For a quant role, the best degree is a PhD in physics. It's simply the very best. An advanced math degree is also really good, and CS/Hard engineering too. An MFE will most likely get you a quant or risk manager role in a bank, not in an algo/quant shop.
this is wrong. why would you study physics for 5 years and moreover be expected to contribute to your field if you were planning to leave for finance? this thread is nonsense guys. people who take math physics and computer science degrees do it because they like those things. to answer your question op the best is computer science, but only to the extent that you can show up and code whatever they tell you. absolutely nothing you study in any of those four areas - math physics comp sci or mfe - is going to help you in a quant finance role. the best you can do to get a job is network. but the best things you can do to learn are surf on Amazon for books, read wilmott and the finance arXiv even if you dont get the math, and learn C++
Just curious- What do you do for a living? And can you explain how knowing math does not help you in any way to do a job that requires a heavy amount of.... um...math?
i recall with a quant head at a well-regarded prop desk saying that he thinks MFE programs teach total crap. prior to that he headed a major FICC desk at a BB. his view is not atypical. increasingly, the kinds of skills that matter on a quant desk are not taught in an MFE program which is focused on bullshit models that are not taken seriously in an industry where technological edge and not analytical edge is the key alpha driver.
Exactly. People want basically core techie programmers (that can squeeze every parsec of performance from the IT infrasture) or highly wired PhD types who can focus on a task and spot a pattern from a mile away.
Remember - in the quant trading world, the back office is mostly automated, not as manual as what you get in banks.
So, why is Physics PhD valued more that computer science or even math? Physics is indeed fully quantitative, but is conceptual physics any help? I would have though that CS/Math is more useful. Thanks, I am new to this.
physics is quantitative in a way that is more useful. math phds spend their time thinking about proving more abstract lemmas about elliptical cohomology and shit like that. physicists know how to get down and code a model for an actual dynamical system.
Yeah. I also think Physics M.Scs/PhDs tend to do a lot more core data analysis than math majors.
Remember - quant trading is all about analyzing data behavior. CS majors almost never get Strat roles, they may however get some quant roles.
To break it down: Strat - does all the strategy work, and predictions. Builds the trading model (and sometimes the trading app) Quant - pretty much assists the Strat. Also does some of the verification/post-trade work, as well as fine tuning CS Grad - Programmer. Code monkey.
In general, the strats are the traders, everyone else works around them. Note that this is just a model, the reality/nomenclature may vary between companies.
One more thing - If you're not in the MIT/Stanford/Berkeley/Caltech/Austin/Illinois (UC) range, you may as well forget the quant shops. Unless of course you have relevant experience.
What's your undergrad in, which school is it from, and what are your grad school options?
MFE and MSCS degrees are often recipes for risk management. Which isn't necessarily bad, but something to be aware of.
Physics PhDs often become pizza delivery guys. The top 20% become professors or quants, maybe top 40-50% at a top school.
Applied Math might be a way to go based on the program.
An engineering undergrad and a finance or business master's is usually a fairly strong combination. But again it's going to depend on the program. Some of the successful MFin majors wind up in the FO at banks; others wind up in the back office or at F500 firms, especially insurance companies (which is also not necessarily a bad place to end up.)
You're basically asking us how to throw a feather into a beer bottle from 20 feet. It's possible, but it's extremely difficult. You've first gotta figure out how to throw that feather 20 feet, and second off gotta figure out how to get it to fall in that bottle. But there are other cans and bowls for it to fall into which have pretty nice prizes attached too. So don't get too obsessed with banking or trading.
Thank you for your insight, Illini. I'm a stats and econ major (possibly a math minor too) at a target school but I've taken quite a few CS and math -department classes so I have a good relationship with a wide range of professors for letters of recommendation.
An MS is my plan B in case I don't get a FT position in the kind of role I want (broadly, quantitative finance of some sort).
I always think a Master's degree looks strongest with 30 months+ of experience in a single job. If you can land in the FO or even MO (Analytics, Risk Management) straight out of school, DO IT, and stick it out long enough for them to have an opportunity to get rid of you. Show future employers you're a hard worker and a survivor.
Agreed. But I think more to the point would be a PhD in high energy physics. Many of the best quants that I know of come from a physics background with some experience with building experiments. I am in Chicago, so maybe it is because of the geography, but there were a lot of guys who jumped into finance from FermiLab.
Read up on what it takes to build a physics experiment, calibrating the collision detector system, and what you need to do to capture the massive flood of data it creates, etc.. you will see more than one parallel to trading. The engineering experience is as important as the theoretical knowledge, and high energy PhD's tend to have both.
yes. and i neglected to mention that physicists usually work in groups AND have experience with high performance computing technology (building and maintaining clusters, etc.)
mathematicians generally work solo with their adviser with as-needed collaborations.
the experiences prepare them for very different things.
what the previous two posts described is not necessarily remotely close to the experience you will have while training to be a physicist. in particular the skills cited, 'calibrating', 'capturing floods of data', high performance computing, and working in groups, can be learned elsewhere. doing high energy physics involves first learning theory which is much harder than these peripheral, finance-applicable tasks
So, all of the physicists/quant traders that I interviewed and worked with over the last five or six years have been totally bullshitting me, I guess...
Of course, HE Physics is not the only place that those particular skills can be learned, it just so happens that people from that space have a skill set that requires a relatively short learning curve. Your own comment should clue you in. Learning something that is really hard, while making a little money, and then go on to something that is relatively easier to make a lot of money..
you're on the wrong site. go to physicsoasis.com to chat about how to get your papers into PRL and nature physics.
So much wrong/outdated information in this thread it's insane...
Ullam voluptate blanditiis sed et. Aliquam exercitationem architecto qui mollitia nemo. Quia architecto voluptatem velit eligendi. Quisquam possimus ut voluptatem mollitia molestiae accusamus. Repudiandae voluptatem dolorem dolor quia ipsam provident quia temporibus. Repudiandae rerum ea dolores dolores est voluptates autem.
Sed voluptatem quasi est quaerat corrupti. Cum enim quia libero quis molestias illum. Fugit quis eligendi deleniti rem expedita eum. Consequatur delectus officia aliquam rerum omnis. Animi autem sunt iure nobis nemo. Debitis neque atque fugit et in molestiae illum optio.
Mollitia vel delectus et eos illum labore. Exercitationem iste quia qui qui sequi sit. Iste deleniti dolor expedita adipisci vel reprehenderit deleniti. A non laborum repellendus.
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...