• C++ Programming for Financial Engineering
    Highly recommended by thousands of MFE students. Covers essential C++ topics with applications to financial engineering. Learn more Join!
    Python for Finance with Intro to Data Science
    Gain practical understanding of Python to read, understand, and write professional Python code for your first day on the job. Learn more Join!
    An Intuition-Based Options Primer for FE
    Ideal for entry level positions interviews and graduate studies, specializing in options trading arbitrage and options valuation models. Learn more Join!

2011-2012 Quantnet Ranking of Financial Engineering (MFE) Programs

Status
Not open for further replies.
I've been skimming through this thread so forgive me if I missed this...

For those who think Baruch is ranked to highly can you state why you believe this is? A previous poster has stated,in so many words, that Baruch is a third tier school - which would definitely be true from an undergrad perspective. However the quality of their MFE program seems top notch and, given their selectivity, I would assume that only very strong candidates get admitted (which does a lot to foster a better learning environment). Is the prestige issue what some posters are getting hung up on? I do believe that institutional prestige should play some role (If I shop an MIT degree in the UK people will certainly recognize the name) however in a specialized field I think that effect is diminished.
 
all right, let's look at how MBA programs are ranked. Here is the link to Financial Time ranking methodology

http://rankings.ft.com/pdf/key/global-mba-rankings-2011.pdf

Where do we see the acceptance rate? not there. In the ranking of this forum, it accounts for 10%, conveniently for small programs such as Baruch.

Where is the 5% bonus point for providing the data to FT? none. By adding 5% to the ranking, Andy is saying that if you don't coordinate, you will be punished. Did Berkeley participate? Andy is not saying anything about it. What about the important doctoral ranking and research ranking where the program is housed? none in Andy's methodology.

Now let's look at US-news methodology

http://www.usnews.com/education/bes.../14/business-school-rankings-methodology-2012

How much is the acceptance rate account? 0.0125. Now compare to Andy's weight of 10%.

What about the Peer Assessment Score in their ranking accounting for 0.25? Where is that in Andy's ranking? Not there.

It seems that ranking practice has been altered to help certain schools.

I wish Andy will set it straight and disclose which program is his client and release the raw data of this ranking if he is willing. As much as I respect his contribution to the quant community, I don't think he'll ever disclose that and attach it to the release email.
 
US News has adds from schools in their ranking edition. Does that disqualify their ranking?

So the ranking is invalid because you say Andy has some affiliation with the school? How come it came in 5th?

You are disrespectful and really add nothing to this ranking or argument against it.
 
US News has adds from schools in their ranking edition. Does that disqualify their ranking?

So the ranking is invalid because you say Andy has some affiliation with the school? How come it came in 5th?

You are disrespectful and really add nothing to this ranking or argument against it.

Dude, don't go too extreme. Schools' ad on US news accounts for very little for their revenue while Baruch's ad here accounts more for quantnet. Don't push it to a ridiculous level. I am trying to point out the difference which seems to benefit Baruch.

I thought talking about methodology is welcome here. If not, what should we talk about? agree on whatever Andy's rank is?

By the way, I have repeated calling for more transparency here, release the raw data. I'll respect your ranking. None of you guys are calling for that. Why? Let other people know who didn't want to advertise here and who didn't participate.

I just remember Andy has said that he reviews MFE applications. I don't which school it is. But wait a minute, I thought only staff members and faculties should do that. It seems to hard to believe that schools will allow somebody who is not a faculty member or staff review application. It is high private and sensitive materials. Whichever school does that, I hope they stop.
 
I will say that having a 10% weighting for acceptance rate does punish those schools that encourage students to submit their applications before actually applying (Berkeley is known for this right?)...
 

atreides

Graduate Student
Dude, don't go too extreme. Schools' ad on US news accounts for very little for their revenue while Baruch's ad here accounts more for quantnet. Don't push it to a ridiculous level. I am trying to point out the difference which seems to benefit Baruch.

You are entitled to your opinions but not to your facts. Can you substantiate the above claim?
 
Maybe what I should say is

One school's ad on US news accounts for more in their revenue than Baruch's ad accounts for quantnet. The difference I pointed out actually make Baruch have lower scores. I don't know how I can prove that?
 
you mfers get butt hurt too ezily...this is why i prefer to deal with ibers, you dont see them argue over MBA rankings
 
you mfers get butt hurt too ezily...this is why i prefer to deal with ibers, you dont see them argue over MBA rankings
Thats true, they argue about important things, like where their alma maters' football team ranks in the AP poll...
 
Whatever man. Please point to another MFE ranking, one that is better. Get real. Andy try's to provide some sort of ranking with a transparent metric and you cry like a baby about it. One second it is wrong because Baruch sucks or is worse than Berkeley, the next second it is because Andy is biased and on the dole. Make up your mind.
 
you mfers get butt hurt too ezily...this is why i prefer to deal with ibers, you dont see them argue over MBA rankings
Perhaps that's because there are MBA rankings made by CREDIBLE AGENTS available so that top MBAs won't need to worry about some distasteful DIY "rank" turning their stomachs?
 
I am sorry but these rankings are deceiving. Putting Chicago so low is not quite right. The truth is that while UChicago MSFM has had problems it remains one of the top programs. Their faculty now teaching is superb. They manage to place a lot of their students in good jobs in Chicago.

For Quantnet, placement being NY-centric I can see why Cornell, Baruch and Columbia would fare well. But please. UChicago has had some problems in the past but these seem to have been sorted out now.

And I would put NYU Courant as no. 1. If placement is taking into account then maybe CMU or Berkeley would do well. But Berkeley MFE or UCLA does not compare with programs housed in the math dept. UChicago is a top school - unfortunately their curriculum was stagnant for a few years but now seems to have been revised for the better.

I have to point out... NYU's placement is great, if not the best... Just see their resumes (showing their summer jobs) put on their website!!!

http://math.nyu.edu/financial_mathematics/content/04_current/class11.html
 
If so many people are bothered with the site or the ranking...Why are they spending so much time here? Shouldn't they be working on their homeworks/education given how good their programs are or at least their personal life?
 
I just came by this post by chance after viewing the ranking this morning. I would like to say that I didn't choose baruch based on some ranking criteria. When I had arrived here, I realized that the program was very demanding and almost everyone here is very friendly. The small cohort and the friends that i have made here will probably last a lifetime. That said, I do hope this program reaches the top three in the near future as it is well deserved.
 
I don't find any of my points conflict each other . But I find you contradicted yourself quit a few times. Hope you know what you are talking about. Otherwise, you can just say: " I am Mr.Nguyen's friend so I will stand by him whatever." And that will be much easier for me to understand your point.

You don't find any of your points conflicting. Well I do. I know Andy and I enjoy this site. With that said I find your attack on him to be disgusting. You basically call into question his reputation and accuse him of being on the take. This is pretty cowardly considering that you hide your identity.

I reiterate. Please post a link to another MFE ranking. You have your opinion which is fine, but when you insult and accuse someone who has done much more for the MFE community than you I take offense.

Until you do you are just a cowardly little person insulting someone who has been much more transparent than you have.
 
So, apparently only Andy has a conflict of ranking and the others who criticize dont. ;)

Moreover, since the methodology is faulty I suggest an improved one which would give a fair chance to every college.
take two dice,roll them and rank each college according to the outcome, In this way instead of 22 we can rank 36 colleges with equal probability for each college.
And finally Andy let a person who has no idea of finance/math roll the dice, this would help in resolving the conflict of interest issue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top