COMPARE Columbia MFE vs MIT MFin

[dnomyar]

Pick the program you would choose if you were admitted to both. No justification necessary.

 

[GoIllini]

It depends on what you want to do. Do you want to be a banker, or do you want to price exotics?

They're two different programs that will set your career in somewhat different directions. Obviously both are finance related, and both programs have people who know some calculus and linear algebra, but that's where the similarities begin to end.

Given the two choices, it would be tough but I'd pick Columbia. My desire to be a quant and prior view that bankers and consultants have a lower competence/asshole ratio would win out over my desire for a front office research or IBD role. But it would be a very difficult choice and determined more by what I want out of life than what MIT or Columbia has to offer the average admit.

There's no right answer on MIT vs. Columbia without knowing more about you and what you want your career to look like.

I would be giving a different answer on MIT vs. Cornell. Or Columbia vs. Duke MSFM. This is a choice between two very and roughly equally elite schools. It is a high quality decision, but it isn't an easy one.

 

[fe app]

i agree with the above. if u wanna do non-quant work then mit but if ur set on quant stuff like i am then mit is not the right choice. ive heard this from many people including big recruiters in the quant space.
i think of mit as an mba program without the work experience. also id be wary of their recruiting, which is slightly combined with the mba or undergrad. so if ur like me with 3 yrs of exp, u dont wanna go up against mbas and u dont want a first time hire from undergrad job as well.

 

[Finance Applicant]

What about Columbia MAFN vs. Mit MFIN?

 

[GoIllini]

What about Columbia MAFN vs. Mit MFIN?

I think MIT MFin probably wins over MAFN (not MSFE). The MAFN has a lot of part time students, and a lot of folks trying to get from IT into S&T. I still think it's a great program and Columbia is a great school in general, but the MAFN gets a little too diluted.

As much as I like to claim that prestige doesn't matter and that we work in a competence-based field, the truth is that it matters for getting interviews, even as a quant. I still have an old recruiting handbook from a now-defunct large Wall Street bank. In their section where they explain how they evaluate candidates and consider differences in schools, the main feature is selectivity. How many students apply to the program and how many get in? My understanding is that MIT MFin is more selective than Columbia MAFN.

I believe MIT gets you out a year earlier, too, and saves you a little on tuition money. Given all of these features, I think MIT is the clear winner against Columbia MAFN.

Again, for IEOR or MSFE, MIT is no longer the clear winner. Both programs beat MIT handily if you're pretty sure you want to be a quant.

 

[ygmwy]

Apples and Oranges, my friend.

 

[Finance Applicant]

I think MIT MFin probably wins over MAFN (not MSFE). The MAFN has a lot of part time students, and a lot of folks trying to get from IT into S&T. I still think it's a great program and Columbia is a great school in general, but the MAFN gets a little too diluted.

As much as I like to claim that prestige doesn't matter and that we work in a competence-based field, the truth is that it matters for getting interviews, even as a quant. I still have an old recruiting handbook from a now-defunct large Wall Street bank. In their section where they explain how they evaluate candidates and consider differences in schools, the main feature is selectivity. How many students apply to the program and how many get in? My understanding is that MIT MFin is more selective than Columbia MAFN.

I believe MIT gets you out a year earlier, too, and saves you a little on tuition money. Given all of these features, I think MIT is the clear winner against Columbia MAFN.

Again, for IEOR or MSFE, MIT is no longer the clear winner. Both programs beat MIT handily if you're pretty sure you want to be a quant.

Thanks for the write up!

Would your opinion change if I said I wanted to be a quant? Which should I choose (MAFN/MFin)?

And actually, I believe the two programs (MAFN/MFin) would end up costing roughly the same. With MIT's tuition being higher but living expensive less. Columbia is 1 or 1.5 years with ~10 k cheaper tuition per semester.

 

[David C.]

Hey, I was an econ undergrad at Columbia College and took the into Math of Finance class taught by Prof. Smirnov about three years ago. It was (is?) one of the 10 classes in the MAFN program. I also took Prof. Brodie's class in IEOR and audited Prof. Derman's class on the Volatility Smile.

The MAFN program is really good but really theoretical. Especially the stochastic methods in finance class (a 6000-level class) has a lot of proofs you're expected to understand and apply to other proofs (e.g. Fubini, Borel-Cantelli I and II and other limit theorems). I was in that class for a few weeks but bailed after the first homework assignment. MFE classes are a bit more accessible, and getting practice in Matlab and R was very helpful for my current job.

I was lucky to get into an S&T rotational program after college and now work as an analyst at a fixed income hedge fund in Connecticut. I'm looking into the evening programs- MAFN, Courant and Tepper.

The MAFN class was about 50% French if I had to guess. Columbia has an exchange program with some top French engineering schools so I think those kids get a master's from Columbia and a master's from their French school. I don't even know if they apply formally or have to take the GRE or even pay Columbia tuition. I do know they are very good at math, stats and programming. The MFE program has more Chinese and Indian students, but a lot of French as well. What was interesting is that American students are probably 10% of the MAFN (like 4 or 5 students) and even less in the MFE.

I'm not sure if this has changed, but MAFN used to have about 40 full-time students and 20 new part-time students every year. I met a few of the part-time students- one was on an HFT desk at Goldman (Indian guy) and another was on an HFT desk at Credit Suisse (Chinese guy). Very sharp people obviously. And believe it or not, there was a managing director in derivatives trading from a BB, like a 40 year old guy. I guess he did engineering as an undergrad and rose through the ranks but now as a manager, he wanted to learn/refresh some quant finance topics.

All my info is from 2010-2011, so things might be different under the new director.

 

[Finance Applicant]

Hey, I was an econ undergrad at Columbia College and took the into Math of Finance class taught by Prof. Smirnov about three years ago. It was (is?) one of the 10 classes in the MAFN program. I also took Prof. Brodie's class in IEOR and audited Prof. Derman's class on the Volatility Smile.

The MAFN program is really good but really theoretical. Especially the stochastic methods in finance class (a 6000-level class) has a lot of proofs you're expected to understand and apply to other proofs (e.g. Fubini, Borel-Cantelli I and II and other limit theorems). I was in that class for a few weeks but bailed after the first homework assignment. MFE classes are a bit more accessible, and getting practice in Matlab and R was very helpful for my current job.

I was lucky to get into an S&T rotational program after college and now work as an analyst at a fixed income hedge fund in Connecticut. I'm looking into the evening programs- MAFN, Courant and Tepper.

The MAFN class was about 50% French if I had to guess. Columbia has an exchange program with some top French engineering schools so I think those kids get a master's from Columbia and a master's from their French school. I don't even know if they apply formally or have to take the GRE or even pay Columbia tuition. I do know they are very good at math, stats and programming. The MFE program has more Chinese and Indian students, but a lot of French as well. What was interesting is that American students are probably 10% of the MAFN (like 4 or 5 students) and even less in the MFE.

I'm not sure if this has changed, but MAFN used to have about 40 full-time students and 20 new part-time students every year. I met a few of the part-time guys- one guy was on an HFT desk at Goldman (Indian guy) and another guy was on an HFT desk at Credit Suisse (Chinese guy). Very sharp guys obviously. And believe it or not, there was a managing director in derivatives trading from a BB, like a 40 year old guy. I guess he did engineering as an undergrad and rose through the ranks but now as a manager, he wanted to learn/refresh some quant finance topics.

All my info is from 2010-2011, so things might be different under the new director.

That's very helpful thanks buddy! If you know anything about job placement for MAFN do you mind sharing it as well?

 

[David C.]

Not sure, you can use LinkedIn and Google to search where people wound up- I think there is a post on Quantnet about the class of 2010 placements.

I'm pretty happy where I am so I don't think I'll be searching for a new job in the next couple years (unless my fund/team loses a lot of money and I'm let go)

 

[David C.]

I think I missed the deadlines for this year anyway, so I'm looking to take a few classes as a non-degree student over the next year and apply formally this fall for Fall 2015.

 

[dnomyar]

Never thought i'd really have to make this decision. Man it's hard. Wish I had a clone

 

[AdamSass]

While visiting Columbia last night, I attended the FE practitioners seminar. I met a hedgefund trader who told me he believed Columbia is more relevant to finance than MIT. I took his word for it. He graduated from NYU courant so he was sort of unbiased, maybe...

Another key advantage of Columbia is you can interview at firms all year long. The students there told me that they started to look for jobs right away; as early as september! It's much easier to interview for positions when they are only a few subway stops away, and there is a lot more finance in NYC. Therefore, you can just get a lot more interviews in, and do them all year round.

The biggest selling point: I think that getting a good job after the program is probably more of a numbers game than a dependency on some minor differences between the MIT/Columbia brands or educations. I could very easily be wrong, but I think Columbia will get you more interviews and subsequently more offers. (I attribute this to the age and reputation of the program, alumni network, networking opp at seminars, internship opp in NYC, and stellar placement stats)

Lastly, Columbia is more 'quanty' and Emanual Derman is awesome and really smart. When I met him, he seemed personally invested in the success of his students which is a nice quality as well.

MIT is halfway between MBA and quant degree. Honestly, I don't know enough about finance hiring to know if that's a good thing or a bad thing. My plan is to get a MFE now, I can always get an MBA later (if I find that I need one). MIT is also a young program that's going through changes. I don't doubt that MIT will be an awesome experience and prepare you for a great career in finance, I just think Columbia is a safer track to get into quant-finance.

I will say that if you are looking for a half MBA half quant degree, then MIT, no brainer. Similarly, if you are looking for something more managerial, or are unsure if you want to be a quant, then also pick MIT. If you are interested in something more startupy / entrepreneurial pick MIT. All else, pick Columbia.

Disclaimer: I am just regurgitating information that I was able to amass through various sources. I don't really know what I am talking about. Or maybe I do, I don't know.

 

[moretodo]

Disclaimer: I am just regurgitating information that I was able to amass through various sources. I don't really know what I am talking about. Or maybe I do, I don't know.

This needs to go on my Business Card!

 

[AdamSass]

lower competence/asshole ratio

:p

 

[david paul]

It depends on what you want to do. Do you want to be a banker, or do you want to price exotics?

They're two different programs that will set your career in somewhat different directions. Obviously both are finance related, and both programs have people who know some calculus and linear algebra, but that's where the similarities begin to end.

Given the two choices, it would be tough but I'd pick Columbia. My desire to be a quant and prior view that bankers and consultants have a lower competence/asshole ratio would win out over my desire for a front office research or IBD role. But it would be a very difficult choice and determined more by what I want out of life than what MIT or Columbia has to offer the average admit.

There's no right answer on MIT vs. Columbia without knowing more about you and what you want your career to look like.

I would be giving a different answer on MIT vs. Cornell. Or Columbia vs. Duke MSFM. This is a choice between two very and roughly equally elite schools. It is a high quality decision, but it isn't an easy one.

but i heard that hedge funds and investing bank more likely to hire PHD in science not people in MFE