COMPARE UCLA MFE vs Columbia MSOR

[jamesthu]

Is that true that the west coast does not have many job opportunities and ucla's program does not have any exposure to wall street firms? Is UCLA not a target school for finance companys?

 

[Lyosha]

UCLA isn't a "target school" for quants, but neither is Columbia, so I don't think going one way or the other will get you past even the round 1 interviews. Target schools are Stanford and MIT... (and Caltech?)

UCLA is on the west coast. The whole "go to college in the place where you want to work" adage applies. Although in this case it is more pronounced than with the case of Berkeley. Only 4 students got internships in NYC out of ~30 students.

However - there is a wildcard. UCLA appears to have almost 100% placement and dedicated career services and support, which (if they are not lying) is on par with top schools. So it seems like you will have a job, a foot in a door, and a start to a career coming out of UCLA.

Columbia MSOR, as discussed numerously on here, is a cash cow for Columbia that they don't appear to care very much for. MSOR has severe trouble with placement (even the "positive" posts on here about it admit as much, with excuses such as 'they didn't have prior industry experience' that don't seem to matter at top programs), and I would not be surprised if half of its graduates are shipped back to their home countries unable to find jobs, after paying ~100k USD to the college.

So basically you have a choice - on one hand you have Columbia MSOR. It is NYC based, the top payoff is higher, but you are super likely to not have a job coming out of it. I would say best case scenario is better, expected value is worse, variance is waaaaaaaaaay worse (not to mention the tail risk of going to columbia msor!)

And on the other hand you have UCLA - you will have a job out of college, expected value is higher due to virtually nonexistant tail risk. But that job will be in cali. Your max payoff is lower.

Which one you pick is a matter of style and up to you. In your shoes, I'd go for UCLA.

 

[darth]

If you have not already , please go through

https://www.quantnet.com/threads/few-clarifications-regarding-columbia-msor.13169/#post-110059

I don't have any idea about UCLA, but one thing that I know is Columbia MSOR has good reputation and placements plus the Ivy league brand name.

I would chose Columbia.

Disclaimer: I am already in Columbia ( Not in MSOR though)

 

[Lyosha]

Columbia MSOR has good reputation

... depends on how far down the QuantNet rankings you're willing to define "good". To me it ends at top 10. There is no MSOR there...

 

[mist]

UCLA appears to have almost 100% placement

I should disagree with this. According to the website,
In 2009, 87%.
In 2010, 86%.
In 2011, 92%.

And, somewhat agree with your opinion about MSOR because it is not really dedicated to MSOR even though you can make your curriculum a lot like MFE one.

 

[darth]

... depends on how far down the QuantNet rankings you're willing to define "good". To me it ends at top 10. There is no MSOR there...

Going by your logic no one should join any program that's not on QN top 10. Reason it is not there is that it is an Operations research program and not FE program.

 

[jamesthu]

Thank you. I was going to choose UCLA, but there is a very bad review of it on the quantnet saying that UCLA windowdress its placement record and have no career service. I'm worried about this. I think MSOR is a cash cow too and I'm really reluctant to go there. But it seems that most people recommend columbia and not a single alumni have every trash talk it.

 

[jamesthu]

If you have not already , please go through

https://www.quantnet.com/threads/few-clarifications-regarding-columbia-msor.13169/#post-110059

I don't have any idea about UCLA, but one thing that I know is Columbia MSOR has good reputation and placements plus the Ivy league brand name.

I would chose Columbia.

Disclaimer: I am already in Columbia ( Not in MSOR though)

Thank you for your reply. MSOR does not post any placement on its website. I'm sure that MSOR's top student would land a great job. But what about an ordinary student in this program? When employer come to the campus to recruit, would they think that there are so many msor that this might be a cash cow?

 

[darth]

Thank you for your reply. MSOR does not post any placement on its website. I'm sure that MSOR's top student would land a great job. But what about an ordinary student in this program? When employer come to the campus to recruit, would they think that there are so many msor that this might be a cash cow?

You have quite valid concerns and I am not in the program so I can't answer them . What i say is based on what i hear from when I meet the students of the program. OR is a diverse field and so are its placements... from facebook to paypal to Goldman to AIG.... and the others that has been mentioned. I am not talking of outlier jobs which I know of some alum like trader with bridgewater and all, above are the average jobs from the program.

With my experience I can tell , you will get the proverbial "bang for the buck" at Columbia.

 

[AshokKumarMuthusamy]

If you are not sure, try to be closer to the place(NYC) where you will find a job.

 

[Lyosha]

I should disagree with this. According to the website,
In 2009, 87%.
In 2010, 86%.
In 2011, 92%.

And, somewhat agree with your opinion about MSOR because it is not really dedicated to MSOR even though you can make your curriculum a lot like MFE one.

You are right - I was looking at their internship stats. But still, ~90% placement is still respectable. That's where CMU and Columbia's MFE program hover, best I can tell. Of course, the quality of opportunities is better at CMU and Columbia's MFE.

The world will probably never know where MSOR placement lies. For a very good reason. Fordham doesn't publish it's placement statistics either. Or NCSU. Or Georgia Tech. I'll give you one guess as to why.

 

[financeguy]

I don't know guys.. Columbia MSOR has taken a severe beating on this forum for a while, and when I graduated from that program years ago I was made to believe from people here on QuantNet that I was one of maybe 10% of graduates who ended up getting placed - and the reason I was placed was because I wasn't Indian or Chinese. Since then, during my role as a trader having worked closely with other traders and quants and risk managers in three different global investment banks in New York and having met many hedge fund clients, I have come across just as many or more Columbia MSOR graduates (both who graduated before and after me) than from any other graduate FE/quant program. I have seen a few from CMU, a few from NYU, one from Chicago, a few from each of Columbia MSFE and MSOR, one from CalTech, one from Stanford, one from Georgia Tech (though he graduated in the golden age of 2006), one from Cornell, one from Michigan (also a golden ager), and none from Baruch. And these graduates come from a variety of ethnic backgrounds and nationalities, including Indian and Chinese. Fair enough, this observation is far from scientific and I get that a smaller percentage of a big number can be larger than a larger percentage of a small number, but in my mind it totally debunks the idea that Columbia MSOR ends up having terrible success in placement. I have no doubt that the placement rate is indeed higher at Baruch, but I think that Columbia MSOR has been criticized way too harshly on QuantNet, to the point that we're actually discussing if UCLA MFE is a better place to go if you want to work in NY?

 

[JohnKim]

I think the primary problem for Columbia MSOR is that Columbia has got 2 contending programs, MFE and MAFN, both of which are more contingent on quantitative finance than MSOR.

 

[financeguy]

I think the primary problem for Columbia MSOR is that Columbia has got 2 contending programs, MFE and MAFN, both of which are more contingent on quantitative finance than MSOR.

While it is very tempting to believe that, as it does seem to be a logical conclusion, this is just not the case - which has been brought up time and time again in this forum. Basically everyone figures, since MSFE and MAFN are quantitative finance programs and MSOR is not, the financial jobs will first go to MSFE and MAFN students and then MSOR students will get whatever is left over. Again, while this sounds plausible, empirically it is simply not what happens. All three programs compete for the same jobs. In fact, all NYC programs including NYU and Baruch compete for these same jobs as well; it's not as if any employer has a quota of each program to fill - they can make all their hires out of just one program or school if they like.

 

[AshokKumarMuthusamy]

I think the primary problem for Columbia MSOR is that Columbia has got 2 contending programs, MFE and MAFN, both of which are more contingent on quantitative finance than MSOR.

Agreed. But if I remember financeguy 's previous posts correctly, recruiters just look students from all 3 programs as a Quant(If you have modeled your course so) from Columbia.

Only difference I find is in the student mixture between MSFE and MSOR. While Columbia tends to admit guys with relevant experience into MSFE and guys with no relevant exp are directed to MSOR. And this fact has been the reason for some good placements for MSFE compared to MSOR and not because of just a change in name of the degree earned.

 

[Andy Nguyen]

Re: UCLA MFE. The program has a new executive director. Her name is Elisa Dunn.

Re: Columbia MSOR. As far back as I can remember, the discussion about this program only started when Columbia MFE began to redirect their MFE rejects to this program. Before that, there was zero discussion about this program because the applicant audience here is mostly MFE/quant finance.
This is the same reason why you rarely see any discussion about similar MSOR programs at other universities such as Duke, Stanford, etc. It would not surprise me if the majority of students in Columbia MSOR originally intended to apply to MFE programs or plan to work in finance instead of other traditional industries for MSOR grads such as manufacturing, etc.

Columbia MFE is not the only program that refers unsuccessful applicants to its sibling program in the same department. Applicants to Columbia MAFN programs have been referred to their Stats program in the same dept. And now applicants to NYU MathFin are being referred to the newly created Data Science program.

 

[financeguy]

Re: UCLA MFE. The program has a new executive director. Her name is Elisa Dunn.

Re: Columbia MSOR. As far back as I can remember, the discussion about this program only started when Columbia MFE began to redirect their MFE rejects to this program. Before that, there was zero discussion about this program because the applicant audience here is mostly MFE/quant finance.
This is the same reason why you rarely see any discussion about similar MSOR programs at other universities such as Duke, Stanford, etc. It would not surprise me if the majority of students in Columbia MSOR originally intended to apply to MFE programs or plan to work in finance instead of other traditional industries for MSOR grads such as manufacturing, etc.

Columbia MFE is not the only program that refers unsuccessful applicants to its sibling program in the same department. Applicants to Columbia MAFN programs have been referred to their Stats program in the same dept. And now applicants to NYU MathFin are being referred to the newly created Data Science program.

Yep that all makes sense. What I'm saying is you can choose to not respect the students who attend this program as much as those in others, and that's fine. You can also choose to believe that the MSOR program does not provide as in depth an education in financial engineering as the top MFE programs, and that's probably true. But what you must accept is that no matter how these students got to the MSOR program, a good number of them are studying some form of quantitative finance, the university allows them to do it, and most employers treat them like any other MFE graduates. I absolutely understand from an academic and principled perspective most posters on this forum don't want to acknowledge that MSOR can be superior to a lot of MFE programs, but practically speaking when it comes to getting hired in NY for most of the jobs MFE students pursue, it definitely is.

 

[Lyosha]

Agreed. But if I remember financeguy 's previous posts correctly, recruiters just look students from all 3 programs as a Quant(If you have modeled your course so) from Columbia.

Only difference I find is in the student mixture between MSFE and MSOR. While Columbia tends to admit guys with relevant experience into MSFE and guys with no relevant exp are directed to MSOR. And this fact has been the reason for some good placements for MSFE compared to MSOR and not because of just a change in name of the degree earned.

I don't think that's accurate.

Look, you're supposed to be a quant so lets do some numbers. The one year Columbia MFE published stats they were on par with the rest of the top 6-7 quant programs. ~90% placement, ~100k starting salary. If you are suggesting that Columbia MFE takes only students with work experience, then what you are effectively suggesting is that Columbia MFE is a place where your experience gets taken to the graveyard, because the program has the same placement stats for people with "relevant experience" as Baruch does for students fresh out of college (only bringing Baruch in b/c htey actually break out those into their own category). And if the top Columbia program manages to only completely discount any value your previous experience might have, why on earth would you ever want to go to place that just squanders your achievements?

I suspect the reality isn't so, because people just aren't that stupid. And I suspect the biggest issue with MSOR is the same as with NYU Poly MFE. It might say NYU on your resume, but it's not their top program, so you are forever branded as "the guy that got rejected from the good program" and your resume no longer focuses on achievement.

financeguy - as I mentioned in my post, if you want a job in NYC, you should pick Columbia MSOR. If you want a job, UCLA appears to be the better choice. You appear to have misread...

 

[Andy Nguyen]

Thank you for your reply. MSOR does not post any placement on its website. I'm sure that MSOR's top student would land a great job. But what about an ordinary student in this program? When employer come to the campus to recruit, would they think that there are so many msor that this might be a cash cow?

A lot of these unnecessary debate can be avoidable had the applicants have placement data to rely on, instead of anecdote from a handful of graduates. It's unclear about the career prospect of the rest.
Columbia MFE has only started to publish some placement stats very recently. The reason is due to the constant inquiry about it from applicants every year. If MSOR students demand to know detailed stats, it will happen. After all, it is under the same department.
Until then, applicants would bet their future on hope and second hand information. It shouldn't come to this. No MBA program would remain in business if they don't publish any placement stats.

 

[shadefaliam]

most posters on this forum don't want to acknowledge that MSOR can be superior to a lot of MFE programs, but practically speaking when it comes to getting hired in NY for most of the jobs MFE students pursue, it definitely is

This is definitely true. Especially many people here who feel that MSOR students from Columbia are competing for the same jobs and in many cases, trumping them, primarily due to the initial advantage of having a Columbia name on the resume.

you are forever branded as "the guy that got rejected from the good program"
This is utter ..... Nowhere have I been made to feel as 'the guy who got rejected from the good program' and the places I have interviewed includes top banks,quant/hedge funds and top analytics consulting firms. Secondly, salary in any program is commensurate to your prior experience. Hence if you believe that everybody from MSFE gets offered a salary of 120k and everybody from MSOR has to contend with 60k, you are mistaken. There are MSOR students who were offered around 93k (with no prior experience) and another small group which was offered around 100-110k. However, usually around 70-90k is the norm.

Thirdly, let me come to this much maligned business of re-directing to MSOR. I was one among them. In our application essays, many candidates like me try to express our enthusiasm for quant finance, our clairvoyant gift of trading etc. and often end up quoting Iraj Kani or Emmanuel Derman (lets accept it!). The admission committee is very quick to recognize this amateur behavior and puts us in a category which shows potential, certainly has the mathematical skills to succeed in a quantitative program, but does not have the understanding or experience of financial markets which could convince the committee that the candidate really wants to be a Financial Engineer. (However, this is not to suggest that there are no students without prior experience admitted in FE. A person I know well, now working in quantitative strategies at Goldman, was a fresh undergrad to MSFE but had relevant research experiences etc.). Now, the redirection to MSOR is an offer to applicants to explore yourself and find a fit in a quantitative career, not necessarily confined to finance. I was admitted to other FE programs too but I asked myself the question if I was really so sure of being a quant/financial engineer that I should go ahead and get a master's degree in a very niche field like Financial Engineering/Financial Mathematics. As a 22 year old straight from undergrad, the anwer was NO. I would probably like to go with something where I could diversity and explore other career options too.

You would be surprised how many people who got redirected end up not pursuing finance at all. Many of them, as in my class, have found a fit in Big Data Analytics/ Machine Learning stuffs and they have obtained great positions for the summer. At the same time, there are few who have not done substantially enough to increase their experience/domain expertise in quantitative finance and still aspire for quant trading/research roles and end up complaining about moving nowhere.