I really enjoy physics but also have a passion for investing. Is it a bad idea to major in physics and minor in finance? Even if my GPA was a 3.2? Also, I am not looking for a quant role. Would hedge funds also care at all for looking at track record in the stock market over 4 years?
| Best Public Markets Gig? ER, MM HF, SM HF, or LO AM? | 13 | 2d | ||
| +43 | How to start a family office (HF rainmaker) | 17 | 1d | |
| +34 | Law to Quant Pivot? | 10 | 2d | |
| +22 | Starting Personal Account | 12 | 4s | |
| +22 | Looking for a Fund Manager to partner with to start a new fund. | 15 | 2h | |
| +21 | People who work at hedge funds, what made you interested initially? | 13 | 17h | |
| +20 | How to destress at Pod HF? | 8 | 12h | |
| +19 | Hedge Fund WLB | 6 | 1d | |
| +19 | HF Final Round Interview | 4 | 4d | |
| +17 | Most appealing public credit seats out of RX? | 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.
Why aren't you interested in quant roles? Just curious.
I’m not a programmer + I find fundamental research to be much more interesting/fun. I’m also not fully informed about what quant roles entail either so maybe that’s why I’m not interested.
Programming is not the most important aspect of being a quant, i wouldn't say... Obviously the job varies. But the programming required for doing quantitative research is often not that hard. Understanding the math, model selection, data selection, etc. is more important. Adapting existing code out there to do what you want to do is generally not that hard from a programming perspective.
Often times, the data/variables/factors/models that are selected have a strong fundamental basis/reason. The constraints put on the model are also often fundamentally/economically based. For example, you might say that variables X and Y should always be positively correlated given some economic/fundamental reason (even if that isn't always true empirically) so you will prevent your optimization engine from doing certain things given that assumption.
I guess if you really enjoy digging into specific companies then that's fine. But I think it's a mistake to think that there aren't a lot of interesting financial/economic understanding behind quantitative models.
Necessitatibus molestiae harum aut rerum. Quos corporis debitis qui voluptas inventore. Non culpa sint voluptatibus harum molestiae non numquam. Delectus facilis eveniet alias repellat quis consequuntur consequuntur. Qui aspernatur illum excepturi esse cum corporis qui quisquam.
Quod ut ut ea. Aut dolorum nostrum sint. Quod et quam dolor veritatis.
A accusamus et omnis numquam omnis quo fugit ratione. Aliquam dolore maiores quibusdam. Maiores repellendus voluptate nesciunt quos non. Quae incidunt officia sint voluptas inventore officia.
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...