COMPARE Columbia MFE and CMU MSCF like always

[QZY]

I just got the second round admission from CMU MSCF(New York Campus). Now I am hesitating between Columbia MFE and CMU MSCF.

I have come across many serious discussions in this forum about similar topic. Generally speaking,
Columbia offers a more solid (or hardcore?) curriculum and the faculty in Columbia is renowned oversea.
CMU has a better career service, and its geographical advantage(close to Wall Street) might lead to a easier access to internship?

The question is: people say that Columbia's career service is bad, but its career placement is better than CMU on the contrary. Then how exactly is CMU's career service better than Columbia?

Also, I saw people say that CMU's classes are "watered down" CS and Finance. Is that true that CMU's curriculum and staff that overrated? If so, why does it rank #1 in Quantnet?

Thank you in advance.

 

[Charles Hammer]

geographical advantage(close to Wall Street) might lead to a easier access to internship?

What? This is absurd. How on earth would that make a difference? They are both in NYC. People flying all the way from San Francisco can get a job, I don't see why being in Morningside Heights is going to be a disadvantage. Interviewers don't care if you walked to interview or took a train or a plane or whatever. If you mean you would have more opportunities for informal encounters, like having coffee or lunch with people working there, that might depend more on your networking skills than your location (in NYC at least).

Columbia offers a more solid (or hardcore?) curriculum and the faculty in Columbia is renowned oversea.

Columbia's courses are the closest to "regular" university courses, in the sense that they are semester-long instead of "minis" like in CMU or "terms" like in UCB. Does that mean they are more "solid" or "hardcore"? I don't know. I suppose you would have a bit more time to digest the material. Since I don't think anybody would have experience with both programs, I guess we'll never know. As for the faculty, I don't know but it may be true.

The question is: people say that Columbia's career service is bad, but its career placement is better than CMU on the contrary. Then how exactly is CMU's career service better than Columbia?

This a bit perplexing to me as well. I suppose it means that they are more involved in helping you.

Also, I saw people say that CMU's classes are "watered down" CS and Finance. Is that true that CMU's curriculum and staff that overrated?

Can you elaborate on this? Do they mean that they are easy? Or that they are superficial?

If so, why does it rank #1 in Quantnet?

Columbia is pretty close (99 vs 100). But dig into the methodology to learn more:

Peer Assessment Score (20%): Each program was asked to rate the 30 programs in the 2017 QuantNet MFE Programs Rankings from 1 (marginal) to 5 (exceptional).

Here CMU (4.3) beats Carnegie (4.0). It could be a reverence to CMU being the oldest and the pioneer program, but I tend to think people in academia are relatively objective.

Placement Success (55%)

• Employment Rate at Graduation (10%)
• Employment Rate Three Months after Graduation (15%)
• Starting Salary (20%)
• Employer Survey Score (10%)

Apart from the "employer survey" the other info is mostly public. I think Columbia wins in the first two, and they tie in the third one. In any case, CMU does worse than the first 6 according to the "aggregate" score provided by Andy.

Student selectivity (25%)

• GRE Scores (15%)
• Undergraduate GPA (7.5%)
• Acceptance Rate (2.5%)

This is in my opinion the most controversial part of the ranking. You'd have to ask Andy why he choose it this way. GRE is pretty useless, GPA can never be an homogeneous measure, and acceptance rate has too little weight, and in any case it could almost be a measure of "popularity" rather than quality (although it is almost a tautology that people like selective institutions). Here supposedly, CMU fares marginally better than Columbia, I am guessing pulled mostly by the GRE scores.


It is worth noting that in the other avilable ranking, Columbia is second and CMU fourth. The methodologies are very similar, except they don't include a "peer assessment" score, nor an "employer survey".

 

[QZY]

Dear Charles, Thank you so much for such comprehensive analysis. I appreciate your effort and acumen opinion. To explain some of my concerns:

Can you elaborate on this? Do they mean that they are easy? Or that they are superficial?

I came across this reply on the forum:

He did not clearly point out how exact CMU's class is "watered down" and I am also curious about it.

So last question, can I assume you prefer Columbia to CMU?

 

[Charles Hammer]

I thought there was going to be more of an argument. That's just hot air our of that guy. Of course and MFE is NOT a CS degreee, they are preparing you to a quant job not a developer job. Jesus.

I'm still making my decision. But I find a couple of things off putting about Columbia.

1) I spoke to two students and they didn't seem to be particularly happy with the program. Not miserable, but somewhat dissatisfied. Hardly a significant sample, but adding that to some comments I've read here and it starts to pile up.

2) One of the things that they told me in particular is that the board doesn't review the curriculum very often. Only a couple of years ago, and almost begrudgingly, the included a Machine learning course (very important subject IMO).

3) I found a general lack of transparency from Columbia that compares very unfavorably against Berkeley and CMU. For instance they don't publish the median salary, they don't give a "class profile" or show a complete list of students. They also don't give many details about the outcome of their students, just a list of "recruiting firms" and "positions". Check CMU's or UCB's webpage to see how this should be reported.

4) Also they somewhat deceptively say that the program "can be finished" in one year. And maybe it can be, but it would be suicide according to the students I spoke. And indeed >90% of students take 3 semesters. That doesn't stop them from putting in the cost of attendance the assumption of "2 semesters + summer"and the curriculum as two semesters. I don't know if this is incompetence or malice, but it is the sort of thing you would expect of a sleazy salesman, not a prestigious university.

5) Adjusting for the fact that it is a 3 semester program, it goes for around ~$125k CoA, which makes it the most expensive program.

But truthfully, if money wasn't a problem, perhaps I would still go to Columbia, mostly because I am a "prestige wh*re". But I need to take a lot of debt to attend this programs and I am a bit weary of the political situation in the US and besides this bull market can't last forever. I still have two great options so I can walk away from this one without regret.


Still, make the best decision for YOU. They are both good programs, so really you can afford to choose for "feeling"; it doesn't have to be a 100% a "rational" decision.

 

[Andy Nguyen]

3) I found a general lack of transparency from Columbia that compares very unfavorably against Berkeley and CMU. For instance they don't publish the median salary, they don't give a "class profile" or show a complete list of students. They also don't give many details about the outcome of their students, just a list of "recruiting firms" and "positions". Check CMU's or UCB's webpage to see how this should be reported.

You may be onto something here. CMU and UCB quant programs are offered by their respective business schools and they do follow some standard protocol on stats reporting. Columbia doesn't publish any stats because they aren't required.
There are many programs that do not publish their admission and employment stats for various reasons. And I don't see that changing soon unless applicants demand so.
As evident here, people still pay to go to such programs even without knowing how many of their graduates will even get a job.

 

[QZY]

@Charles Hammer haha, just let the haters hate. I feel so happy to talk with you. Great help! I wish you the best of luck at the college you have will to attend!

 

[abcdefgrqq]

hi did you get an interview? Can you share your timeline? I'm also a round 2 applicant but have not heard anything from them so far...

 

[QZY]

hi did you get an interview? Can you share your timeline? I'm also a round 2 applicant but have not heard anything from them so far...

Actually I was placed in the waiting list of the first round on the decision making date(3/20). Then I was asked to schedule an interview, and I chose 3/31. I received the offer on 4/15 marked as second round, but I actually I applied for the first round. I have to pay the deposit by 5/5, therefore I assume that the admission process will last till that date.

 

[abcdefgrqq]

Actually I was placed in the waiting list of the first round on the decision making date(3/20). Then I was asked to schedule an interview, and I chose 3/31. I received the offer on 4/15 marked as second round, but I actually I applied for the first round. I have to pay the deposit by 5/5, therefore I assume that the admission process will last till that date.

Thanks for the info! Have you decide where to go ?

 

[QZY]

Thanks for the info! Have you decide where to go ?

I will go to cmu

 

[abcdefgrqq]

I will go to cmu

great and congratulation!