2009 Quantnet Ranking of Financial Engineering (MFE), Quantitative Finance Programs

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Advanced Trading ranking has already been widely distributed and discussed on this forum...
 
These rankings crack me up

A most cursory inspection of your "methodology" reveals that the underlying data can be readily gamed by a dozen or so members of a second-rate public institution.

Please do not take these seriously.

BTW, I notice the deafeningly silent response to GoIllini's earlier observation:

"Why doesn't quantnet just make the scoring algorithm open-source? That would make it easier for everyone to independently review and verify the rankings."

The need for a "proprietary" algorithm is more than a bit suspicious.
 
I'm very curious to learn about how you would game a system which relies heavily on correlation. This was one of the first thing came across our minds when working on the methodology. Until this day, I'm pretty sure you can't but you are welcome to give it a try.

Why the need for a "proprietary" algorithm? Because we had other business plans for our algorithm and the MFE ranking is just an example of its use. We can rank anything that has enough data points.

Privately, people from other programs have tested our methodology after the ranking came out and they came up with the same ranking so we are certain people who understand our methodology can recreate it. We reveal as much info on the methodology as possible without jeopardize our business plans.

But it's irrelevant now to talk about Xmarks since the company just announced that it will consider closing down at the end of the year.
Xmarks Blog

One thing you can be sure is that our next ranking won't rely solely on Xmarks data (or at all). What and how, you will just have to wait. In the mean time, we will keep the data on the ranking fresh.
 
You can game any system if you can game the data. And it certainly looks like your data can be gamed.
 
Seeing is believing.

Like I said before, you have our methodology to play with and I'm looking forward to seeing your method on how to game the data and the system. Would you single-handedly be able to game it all or you need a team of people to pull this off?

Nothing is more interesting to us than to read a well explained research from you. We ALWAYS welcome flaw findings, comments.
 
Is QuantNet working on a new version of MFE program Ranking? I'm looking forward to see a 2011 version.
Also, I wonder why this 2009 version only included 23 programs. Are these 23 programs meant to be the top 23?
 
The 2011 Quantnet MFE Ranking process is well underway. This year, we request relevant admission/placement data from MFE programs and many of them have submitted their data.

As always, subscribe to our newsletter and be the first to know about the new ranking
Subscribe here http://eepurl.com/hekE
 
Freakin sweet. Love what you're doing. Nothing else really like this....
 
Yes. The level of participation from programs in our 2011 ranking is very high.

Can everyone do me a favor? Please take a look at the 2009 ranking, and let me know if any of the tuition is no longer correct. I updated a few programs recently but haven't got to all of them yet.
The more accurate data we have there, the better.
 
Tuition for Columbia Math Fin program is slighly higher this year. The exact figure is 20278 for one sem(2011-2012)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom