COMPARE CMU (Pittsburgh) VS Columbia MFE

[BusyLearnin]

I have offers from both. Both schools are crazy expensive, although CMU more so, and I'm torn between which to accept.

I'm hoping to work for a few years before re-evaluating and potentially going for a PhD. If I accept Columbia, I'll be interning while I study to help my employment prospects.

Which do you think has a higher quality of education? Which do you think gives me a better chance of getting a better job?

I've heard that Steven Shreve teaches the Stochastic Calculus course at CMU. Can any recent grads or current students confirm this? If so, does he actually teach or do the teaching assistants do the majority of it?

 

[mhy]

I can confirm that Steve Shreve has taught Stochastic Calculus II for at least the last two years, along with Risk Management II.

All classes at CMU are taught by professors. TA sessions are held separately and no classes are taught by TAs.

 

[pingu]

I'm hoping to work for a few years before re-evaluating and potentially going for a PhD. If I accept Columbia, I'll be interning while I study to help my employment prospects.

If you work, you won't go back to get a PhD. You can forget about it.

 

[Kevin Ramlal]

If you work, you won't go back to get a PhD. You can forget about it.

I don't get the logic behind this reasoning, and I've seen it a few times on this forum. If you are working in a field that is related to what you want to do a PhD in, I don't think you are going to lose knowledge of relevant topics. In fact one could argue that, after being in the industry for a few year, you gain an understanding of where there is need for better research, and choose to do your thesis on that topic.

Also, I came across this interesting part-time phd at Imperial, designed for those who have had a few years of working experience in quant finance. PhD in Mathematical Finance | Imperial College London

^Scroll toward the bottom of that link. Anyone familiar with this program, or have any thoughts on this?

 

[BusyLearnin]

pingu, why do you think that MFE grads won't or can't go back for a PhD after working?

 

[littlelotuss]

Most PhD programs in Mathematical Finance is really theoretical. I mean, they are just playing with probability, stochastic analysis etc, which is quite different from what you would do as a quant. So it's hard to say whether work experience is an asset. Besides, phd usually end up with a faculty position, you might be earning less than being a quant, especially in Europe.

 

[pingu]

I don't get the logic behind this reasoning, and I've seen it a few times on this forum. If you are working in a field that is related to what you want to do a PhD in, I don't think you are going to lose knowledge of relevant topics. In fact one could argue that, after being in the industry for a few year, you gain an understanding of where there is need for better research, and choose to do your thesis on that topic.

Also, I came across this interesting part-time phd at Imperial, designed for those who have had a few years of working experience in quant finance. PhD in Mathematical Finance | Imperial College London

^Scroll toward the bottom of that link. Anyone familiar with this program, or have any thoughts on this?

Part Time PhDs are usually money making schemes. PhD degrees are research degrees so they expect you to do research. If you work, you won't have time to do research. It will be very difficult. You are usually expected to do PhD full time.

MFE are terminal degrees to get a job. After you get a job, it will be very hard for you to go back and get a PhD (not impossible but harder).

If you think you can do it, go ahead and prove me wrong. You can come back and tell us your story.

 

[pingu]

pingu, why do you think that MFE grads won't or can't go back for a PhD after working?

they won't. After working for a while, it will be painful to go back and do a PhD. You will realize the value of a PhD is not as big as you thought it was to begin with.

 

[Daniel Duffy]

If you work, you won't have time to do research.

Indeed.

 

[IntoDarkness]

Part Time PhDs are usually money making schemes. PhD degrees are research degrees so they expect you to do research. If you work, you won't have time to do research. It will be very difficult. You are usually expected to do PhD full time.

MFE are terminal degrees to get a job. After you get a job, it will be very hard for you to go back and get a PhD (not impossible but harder).

If you think you can do it, go ahead and prove me wrong. You can come back and tell us your story.

money making? probably yes. but considering many full-time econ/finance phd now only churn out empirical research thesis, full-timers are not that much better.

 

[BusyLearnin]

While this isn't really helping my CMU VS Columbia decision - I'm really appreciating all the information.

I know someone who finished an MFE, worked for a few years and then went back to earn his PhD - it was difficult but he claimed that it helped his career a great deal. When you say that the value of a PhD is not as much as I think, do you think it has a lot of value for someone who wants to go into quantitative research? Do you think I'd be able to get such a position without a PhD, after completing an MFE program? What do you think I should be doing, while enrolled to maximize my chances of getting such a position?

Thanks again for all the info.

 

[pingu]

I know someone who finished an MFE, worked for a few years and then went back to earn his PhD - it was difficult but he claimed that it helped his career a great deal.

That's one data point. I know >1 MFE graduates that wanted to do PhD and after entering the workforce, dished those ideas. If you establish yourself there is no need for PhD.

When you say that the value of a PhD is not as much as I think, do you think it has a lot of value for someone who wants to go into quantitative research? Do you think I'd be able to get such a position without a PhD, after completing an MFE program? What do you think I should be doing, while enrolled to maximize my chances of getting such a position?

Thanks again for all the info.

I don't think you know what you want. You have an idea but actually no clue of how things really work. Get a job and find out how things are in real life. Then decide if a PhD will be helpful.

 

[SethiSS]

What if we don't want to go for a PhD and have offers from CMU MSCF and CU MFE (and MIT which I think should be out of the question) . Which one to choose? I am worried about the career cell over at Columbia. And want to understand how does it work there at Columbia. CMU is definitely better in that sense. But its leaving NY we are talking about. I am confused.

 

[Ashuko A Wang]

I'm hoping to work for a few years before re-evaluating and potentially going for a PhD.

Most PhDs in QF had followed a PhD path with an interest in something, later found themselves suited for QF. If you work for a while and then go back to pursue your PhD, the main challenge is whether you will be able to endure the industry temptation and commit strictly to your research, which is a lot different from MFE or related masters. Maybe this discussion helps?
https://www.quantnet.com/threads/the-value-of-a-phd-and-mfe-degree.16915/

 

[AJ Burnett]

I have offers from both. Both schools are crazy expensive, although CMU more so, and I'm torn between which to accept.

I'm hoping to work for a few years before re-evaluating and potentially going for a PhD. If I accept Columbia, I'll be interning while I study to help my employment prospects.

Which do you think has a higher quality of education? Which do you think gives me a better chance of getting a better job?

I've heard that Steven Shreve teaches the Stochastic Calculus course at CMU. Can any recent grads or current students confirm this? If so, does he actually teach or do the teaching assistants do the majority of it?

I thought he'd be retiring this summer (2016) after his retirement conference last year:
Methods of Mathematical Finance: a conference in honor of Steve Shreve’s 65th birthday
He's a great teacher and scholar.

 

[Mensa]

I thought he'd be retiring this summer (2016) after his retirement conference last year:
Methods of Mathematical Finance: a conference in honor of Steve Shreve’s 65th birthday
He's a great teacher and scholar.

He is still active. I don't think he will retire in the following several years, unless health problems. Robert Merton, 71 years old, is still active in teaching and research at MIT. Many Professors have very long career and longevity. One reason I think is they always keep the brain thinking.

 

[Sonny D]

as for "interning helping you find employment", that is very much so. A lot of the big banks have trouble hiring people for cost reasons, but they DO have interns. It is much easier to convert an intern into a full time than to do outside interviewing. So much so, that a bunch of banks pretty much ONLY hired their interns last year

 

[quantquanta]

as for "interning helping you find employment", that is very much so. A lot of the big banks have trouble hiring people for cost reasons, but they DO have interns. It is much easier to convert an intern into a full time than to do outside interviewing. So much so, that a bunch of banks pretty much ONLY hired their interns last year

what if one couldn't get an internship at a bank? does that mean those people don't have much of a shot at getting a fulltime offer? Most people in my program are doing unpaid internships at startup hedgefunds if that matters

 

[Mensa]

what if one couldn't get an internship at a bank? does that mean those people don't have much of a shot at getting a fulltime offer? Most people in my program are doing unpaid internships at startup hedgefunds if that matters

Not quite. Sometimes finding full-time is much easier than summer internship (at least for international students), for the following reasons:
1. Full-time positions are much more;
2. Competitions are relatively less; i.e, applicants for full-time positions are much less than summer. Because many graduates choose to go back their country, a lot of them would not join the recruitment season. For example, that's why Columbia MAFN has better full-time placement results than summer internships.
3. Many candidates have secured employment after their summer internships.

 

[quantquanta]

Not quite. Sometimes finding full-time is much easier than summer internship (at least for international students), for the following reasons:
1. Full-time positions are much more;
2. Competitions are relatively less; i.e, applicants for full-time positions are much less than summer. Because many graduates choose to go back their country, a lot of them would not join the recruitment season. For example, that's why Columbia MAFN has better full-time placement results than summer internships.
3. Many candidates have secured employment after their summer internships.

thank you that's good to know. just curious why did you mention columbia mafn? did you go there?