Master Programs Comparison: Which quant program to choose?

[knightinberlin]

Hey, could you let me know which program did you finally end up going with, and share your reasoning as well?

 

[HyperQuant]

Hello,

I hope this message finds you well! As an applicant who's very curious about FE but lacking experience, I'm reaching out to seek your advice regarding my admission decisions.

I'm honored to be accepted to Columbia's MSFE program, which I intend to enroll.

However, before I do so, I wanted to ensure I have not neglected to consider the other two programs I've been admitted to: NCSU MFM and Duke's MEng Fintech, both of which are in my home state.

I would greatly appreciate your advice or any words of wisdom on this decision. Is there anything I may have failed to consider by accepting Columbia's offer as someone seeking to become a quant trader (buy side)?

Thank you in advance for your advice! I'm grateful for this community and your assistance.

 

[Andy Nguyen]

As someone without relevant experience, you will have a really hard time to get a role as a buy-side quant trader out of the Columbia MFE (Financial Engineering) program. A lot of their graduates struggle to find jobs from the recent reviews on QuantNet.
What is your backup plan if you fail to get that role and when the reality hits?
NCSU has a realistic outcome where people expect to have a good shot at a job in risk management in Charlotte area.
You may have all the quality to succeed on your path to get one of the most sought after job by thousands of MFE graduates every year.
However, I would be irresponsible to not point out that I have seen many graduates who had unrealistic expectation and without a job.

 

[HyperQuant]

As someone without relevant experience, you will have a really hard time to get a role as a buy-side quant trader out of the Columbia MFE (Financial Engineering) program. A lot of their graduates struggle to find jobs from the recent reviews on QuantNet.
What is your backup plan if you fail to get that role and when the reality hits?
NCSU has a realistic outcome where people expect to have a good shot at a job in risk management in Charlotte area.
You may have all the quality to succeed on your path to get one of the most sought after job by thousands of MFE graduates every year.
However, I would be irresponsible to not point out that I have seen many graduates who had unrealistic expectation and without a job.

Hello Andy, thank you so much for your advice! I appreciate you mentioning the career outcomes from the programs, and the disclaimer regarding buy-side roles.

I was wondering as a hedge if Columbia MFE would still keep me competitive for risk management roles, or is NCSU truly superior in that regard? As in, would attending Columbia still prepare me the best overall in relevant qualifications for a career?

I'm certainly flexible in my career path. I'm grateful for your support!

 

[Andy Nguyen]

Columbia is in NYC, the world's biggest financial center. This means easy access to all the biggest firms and the wide breath of opportunities.
At the same time, Columbia has multiple master programs producing hundreds of graduates aiming for the same kind of jobs that you apply for.
NYC and the tristate area is also home to other top ranked programs such as Baruch, Princeton, CMU, Cornell, etc. This is to say you are one of thousands of people aiming for the same jobs every year. Unless you got in a program that has personal relationships with banks via alumni network with their own pipeline to unadvertised positions, getting a job is not a given.
Just go on LinkedIn and search for alumni of Columbia who graduated in Dec 2023 until now and you have a better idea.
NCSU is not superior the way you put it. It used its location and network with regional banks to their advantage. There are fewer competition in Charlotte so they crave out a niche for themselves.
For risk management roles, I think you can get them from any program just because competition is not that pierce. Some programs have a stronger focus on risk management where other have a more focus on sell-side pricing/stochastic.
Having a realistic expectation and clear eyed about the industry will prepare you to be a happier professional.

 

[gkngm]

Hi folks,

I'm a data scientist in Europe with 5 YOE outside of finance. I have a strong ML and NLP background and research experience and want to pivot to quant finance because as it looks more challenging intellectually. I have been trying to get interviews for months without much success so I applied to MFE programs.
I have been accepted to Imperial MathFin and now I wonder if it's worth going to the US considering that my only other comparable options would be CMU MSCF and Columbia MFE.

Pros of US:
- Larger job market
- Much better career prospects in general

Cons of US:
- More competitive job market
- Higher tuitions
- Programs take at least 6 month more than imperial mathfin
- Higher cost of living in general

I don't think I like US enough to spend more than 5-10 years after the program over there, I would certainly go back to Europe after.

All things considered here is my ranking so far:
1. CMU MSCF
2. Imperial MathFin
3. Columbia MFE

What's your point of view on that?

Thank you in advance

 

[HyperQuant]

Columbia is in NYC, the world's biggest financial center. This means easy access to all the biggest firms and the wide breath of opportunities.
At the same time, Columbia has multiple master programs producing hundreds of graduates aiming for the same kind of jobs that you apply for.
NYC and the tristate area is also home to other top ranked programs such as Baruch, Princeton, CMU, Cornell, etc. This is to say you are one of thousands of people aiming for the same jobs every year. Unless you got in a program that has personal relationships with banks via alumni network with their own pipeline to unadvertised positions, getting a job is not a given.
Just go on LinkedIn and search for alumni of Columbia who graduated in Dec 2023 until now and you have a better idea.
NCSU is not superior the way you put it. It used its location and network with regional banks to their advantage. There are fewer competition in Charlotte so they crave out a niche for themselves.
For risk management roles, I think you can get them from any program just because competition is not that pierce. Some programs have a stronger focus on risk management where other have a more focus on sell-side pricing/stochastic.
Having a realistic expectation and clear eyed about the industry will prepare you to be a happier professional.

Hello Andy,

I greatly appreciate you providing me with this information, including the job competition and the differences in focus for the programs. I will be sure to do more research specifically on risk management to have a better idea and realistic expectation.

Thank you so much!!

 

[Andy Nguyen]

@gkngm
Congrats on getting into these programs.
Can I request that you put your application timelines to the Tracker? Having the data points from a high calibre applicant like you helps our community a lot in accessing the chance to get into top programs.
Did you apply to other programs besides these 3?
Your choice really comes down to Imperial vs CMU. Columbia MFE has a 56% placement rate in the US 3 months after graduation so basically only half of their 100+ graduates get a job in the US.
Moving to Europe after working in the US for a few years is easier than doing the other way. You basically try to transfer to a UK branch of your employer. The compensation in the US is so much higher than the rest of the world so this is something to keep in mind.
I certainly see the point of living in Europe vs the US. Much more enjoyable life style vs the rat race in the US.
As for Imperial, their reviews indicate that the brand name attract enough employers that students can get jobs through the events organized by the program.
As you put your timelines to the Tracker, please let us know when you end up.

 

[karelm]

Ok, I have no idea what to choose if I'm admitted to MIT MFIN. I already have an offer for msc mathematics and finance from Imperial. My goal is too work in London at bank ass a trader.

 

[Vedanttt]

Hello! I am currently a Masters of Engineering student at Lancaster University, Class of 2015. I have applied to 8 universities for the MQF/MFE programme for Fall 2015. My profile is as follows:
GRE: 319 Q165 V154
CGPA: 62%, 3.0
TOEFL: 106
Excellent extra curricula, 3 internships, 3 good projects (one fully funded by Mitsubishi Electric).
Very good at C/C++, Java certified
I have applied to universities that are rather safe/moderate for my profile and I have received acceptances from 3 univs so far.
1. SUNY Buffalo
2. Singapore Management University
3. Boston University
I am having a tough time picking one of the three. BU is extremely expensive and I am not sure if it is worth the investment for somebody from a middle class family like me. SUNY B and SMU both have a good course structure and nominal fee. Could you please help me select! Job scenario is one of the main criteria.
Please reply ASAP.
Regards

SUNY Buffalo

 

[Andy Nguyen]

Please add your application timeline details on the Tracker. Thanks
Getting into the Imperial program is a good sign.
MIT is so different from Imperial and they are in two different continent.
Nobody can advise unless they know what you want to do out of the program.

 

[karelm]

Please add your application timeline details on the Tracker. Thanks
Getting into the Imperial program is a good sign.
MIT is so different from Imperial and they are in two different continent.
Nobody can advise unless they know what you want to do out of the program.

Yep adding to the tracker now!

 

[neill_gonz]

Ok, I have no idea what to choose if I'm admitted to MIT MFIN. I already have an offer for msc mathematics and finance from Imperial. My goal is too work in London at bank ass a trader.

Choose MIT.

It's interesting at how both universities have similarities. I would call Imperial the MIT of UK.

Imperial MSc Math and Fin: more for quant roles, of course. Very hard course. Their courses are more theoretical/pure math. Imperial will try to place you in an industry internship with your dissertation. Their program director is well known with strong connections. Well done for getting an offer.

Good stuff: math fin at imperial is well known in UK. Career service is amazing. their modules are good.

Downside: 7 core modules and 5 electives from october to april, then exams. then dissertation until september. You will really work lol. London salaries are bad relative to cost of living. The stories I heard about Imperial are discouraging and you will feel like you're in hell. If you want that then please be my guest.

MIT MFin: you can choose concentrations and you will be surrounded by truly amazing people. course isn't as pure math heavy and more relevant to finance. Imperial is more on quant. MIT's MFin is under MIT Sloan School of Management - it is at its base more on finance. MIT Sloan is part of the M7 Business schools.

Good stuff: to follow on from the reviews, it's MIT. Boston is a cool place, european like. Career services are amazing. You can choose an 18 month course, which gives you time to learn stuff in greater depth. US universities are generally easier than their UK counterparts (but why do people go to US colleges? because the universities are more prestigious, which is what matters most). The people you meet at MIT will be amazing. Network with them. Be their friends. You never know, they may start billion-dollar mc companies and may get you a job one day. With US universities, your top aim should be to network. Networking gets you jobs. Hard programs bring you tears.

Downside: courses can be crowded with others but it's alright. Tbf they have double the cohort as imperial. MIT is more expensive. Some have said it's a certificate course lol...but it's MIT. You are paying for the name, the prestige, the network. Boston does not have as big of a financial center as London but as you said, you will be back in London, so it shouldn't matter.

Overall I say MIT because of the name and opportunities at your doorstep. At the end of the day, no one cares how hard you work. Sorry to say that but that's life. Employers don't care how difficult a course is. Imperial has good name but MIT has a better name and you can achieve your goals by working less. Remember, you are trying to get a good job to pay your bills, not flex on people that you did a hard course.

At this time, UK is not good. Economy is not great and has not been great for 17 years. It is moments like this you need to stand out. MIT > Imperial.

Also you did not specify what type of trader so I assumed you just wanted to be a tradfi guy.

I hope you get into MIT. If you do, only look back to London for jobs, as you stated since it's what you want.

 

[karelm]

Choose MIT.

It's interesting at how both universities have similarities. I would call Imperial the MIT of UK.

Imperial MSc Math and Fin: more for quant roles, of course. Very hard course. Their courses are more theoretical/pure math. Imperial will try to place you in an industry internship with your dissertation. Their program director is well known with strong connections. Well done for getting an offer.

Good stuff: math fin at imperial is well known in UK. Career service is amazing. their modules are good.

Downside: 7 core modules and 5 electives from october to april, then exams. then dissertation until september. You will really work lol. London salaries are bad relative to cost of living. The stories I heard about Imperial are discouraging and you will feel like you're in hell. If you want that then please be my guest.

MIT MFin: you can choose concentrations and you will be surrounded by truly amazing people. course isn't as pure math heavy and more relevant to finance. Imperial is more on quant. MIT's MFin is under MIT Sloan School of Management - it is at its base more on finance. MIT Sloan is part of the M7 Business schools.

Good stuff: to follow on from the reviews, it's MIT. Boston is a cool place, european like. Career services are amazing. You can choose an 18 month course, which gives you time to learn stuff in greater depth. US universities are generally easier than their UK counterparts (but why do people go to US colleges? because the universities are more prestigious, which is what matters most). The people you meet at MIT will be amazing. Network with them. Be their friends. You never know, they may start billion-dollar mc companies and may get you a job one day. With US universities, your top aim should be to network. Networking gets you jobs. Hard programs bring you tears.

Downside: courses can be crowded with others but it's alright. Tbf they have double the cohort as imperial. MIT is more expensive. Some have said it's a certificate course lol...but it's MIT. You are paying for the name, the prestige, the network. Boston does not have as big of a financial center as London but as you said, you will be back in London, so it shouldn't matter.

Overall I say MIT because of the name and opportunities at your doorstep. At the end of the day, no one cares how hard you work. Sorry to say that but that's life. Employers don't care how difficult a course is. Imperial has good name but MIT has a better name and you can achieve your goals by working less. Remember, you are trying to get a good job to pay your bills, not flex on people that you did a hard course.

At this time, UK is not good. Economy is not great and has not been great for 17 years. It is moments like this you need to stand out. MIT > Imperial.

Also you did not specify what type of trader so I assumed you just wanted to be a tradfi guy.

I hope you get into MIT. If you do, only look back to London for jobs, as you stated since it's what you want.

Thank you so much for your response. Definitely some very good points for MIT. Only thing that kind of bothers me is --
- I feel like London is a better city than Boston (both from a lifestyle perspective and from a networking standpoint)
- I feel like Imperial in London is nearly as well regarded as MIT so I'm not sure the added value of MIT is that much but I don't really know.

Anyways thank you so much for your insights.

 

[sheamusthegreatkhali]

I'm an Indian and have got an interview invitation from ETH Zurich for their MQF program. I wanted to ask, how much easy are employment opportunities post the degree? I couldn't find any data points. I'd to let go of my UC Berkeley MFE Admission this year because of financial constraints ( I come from a low middle class income family ) and some negative reviews from UCB Alumini. ETH Zurich MQF seems cheap but I'm having double thoughts now on employment opportunities.

Current background:
Tier 1 IIT CSE Graduate from India
Currently working as a Quant Strat Associate at a BB (~3 years of Experience)

I'm wondering if I should wait for an year and apply to UC Berkeley again or go with ETH Zurich.

My motivation is to move outside India. I'm fine with both Europe or USA but don't want to do a degree that can impact my employment opportunities afterwards. Can someone share light for a non EU citizen how's the scene of employment for ETH Zurich grads?

 

[neill_gonz]

Thank you so much for your response. Definitely some very good points for MIT. Only thing that kind of bothers me is --
- I feel like London is a better city than Boston (both from a lifestyle perspective and from a networking standpoint)
- I feel like Imperial in London is nearly as well regarded as MIT so I'm not sure the added value of MIT is that much but I don't really know.

Anyways thank you so much for your insi

Hi,

You are right to point out the London vs Boston thing. Lifestyle wise, London is arguably the 2nd best in the world; for a student, it is the best *student* city in the world, if you have money. Networking wise, at the face of it, you are right to point out that London is better at that standpoint, however there's 3 things to note here:

1. If you choose to study at Imperial, it will be harder to network outside of their prepared company presentations because you will spend lots of time academically doing MSc Math and Finance. Unless you already have previous experience (internship/full time), you will be adding extra stress to find a job while doing your academics. Imperial is a "live, breathe, and die for your program" sort of thing, unless you go to the business school, which is easier.

2. American universities are prime for networking, that's what university is about in America tbh. In US Colleges, you will need to network and so you will for sure nurture that skill while London . Sure, I agree that Boston < London You learn more practical and relevant skills in American colleges, which you can then take back to London. Practical skills and networking are much more important. Also at MIT, your lecturers will be full of people who have worked (or are still working) in huge institutions. Imperial does not give that opportunity as much as MIT does.

3. Going to Imperial MSc Math Fin won't give you a lifestyle lol.

To your point about Imperial being as well regarded as MIT in London:

1. I agree to an extent with this sentiment. I know people in London who has said that Imperial is ranked no.1 in the world despite there being no ranking to suggest so. In the usual case that Imperial is no.2, MIT is the one that is no.1, based off QS rankings. I would not look too much into rankings. I would look more into the networking opportunities and relevant knowledge to learn.

2. Imperial has, realistically, only been relevant for 10 years at best, and that's mainly because of it's QS rankings. Without that ranking, it does not have that much of a talking point. It is not that sort of thing that people for generations have been talking about. Not like oxbridge, hypsm, and the other ivy leagues. Not even LSE. Reputation in finance wise, Imperial is not even on par with LSE when it comes to finance. I was wide awake when UCL was ranked and considered better than Imperial, until Imperial overtook them only recently.

3. MIT will add greater value to your CV. As the quantnet saying goes, "it's MIT". You never hear that with Imperial. Not even with Oxbridge.

4. Course wise, at Imperial you may be forced to go quant because the things you learn in that program is not as applicable in tradfi. Quant is a whole different level and based off what you said, I assume you don't need it. Might I add you learn these quant courses at MIT, just choose the Financial Engineering or Capital Markets concentration. You will learn these while not going through the hellish (and honestly unnecessary) rigors of Imperial.

Remember: you are trying to get relevant skills and a top university name to get a job to put food on the table. Telling people you did a hard course at imperial won't put food on the table. It will put tears of suffering and maybe mental health problems instead. Take the potential opportunity to be away from the UK for 1.5 years. Refresh your mindset and gain real skills, not flex about the Girsanov Theorem. Come back with an MIT degree and make sure you dominate the City of London.

...and who knows, with an MIT degree, you may even start your own company in the future

 

[the_bolt_the_lightning_the_thunder]

Might be an unpopular opinion but I’d vote for Imperial especially for quant positions. MIT has great reputation, #1 in the world ofc, but that reputation is largely due to their undergraduate and doctorate education. I think recruiters will look at the specific program that you’re in, not just your school’s name. And I don’t think MFin and Sloan in general are in the same level of prestige as other MIT programs. (Also those corp finance courses?)
My opinion might be a little biased tho because I’m more of an engineer so anything business school related/ hosted in a business school tends to give me the ick lol
Also, are you a US citizen? Do you wanna work in the US after graduation? Because moving from UK to US for work is much harder than the other way around.

 

[zzzz]

Hi all,

I’m deciding between CMU MSCF and CBS MSFE and would love some advice.

I’m not entirely sure if I want to do quant long-term, but I’m considering a career in PE or Hedge Funds, ideally in fundamental or macro investing. I enjoy investment strategy and decision-making but still want to leverage my technical skills—just not in a purely quant role.

Here’s how I see each program (correct me if I’m wrong):

CMU MSCF – Stronger career support, especially in quant finance, with structured recruiting and practical courseworks. But I worry it leans too much toward quant trading & systematic investing, which isn’t exactly my focus. It’s also more affordable in terms of tuition and living costs.

Columbia MSFE – The coursework seems more aligned with my previous backgrounds and my interets towards PE & fundamental hedge funds, but I’ve heard mixed things about job placement and career support. I couldn’t find 2024 placement data, so I’m unsure how strong the buy-side recruiting is.

Overall, my biggest concerns are:

1. Which program has better buy-side placement for the field other than pure quant?
2. Will CMU limit my chances of breaking into PE/Macro roles?

Would love to hear from alumni or anyone with insight. Thanks!

 

[zoro_renish]

Hi Everyone!
I'm in a bit of a dilemma about which of the two programs I should join. I have admits from Berkeley for Spring 2026 (they did give me a last-minute admit for Spring 2025 but I chose not to go and reapply), and an admit from Chicago for this Fall with a 20% Scholarship.
Would appreciate any advice in terms of program curriculums, ease of learning in a 12-month (UCB) vs 18-month (UChicago) setup, placements, weather, cost of living, etc etc.
Also, is the scholarship amount offered by UChicago fixed once given out? The criteria of the scholarship seems to be pretty black box, so does anyone have any idea how it is decided?
Would be great to chat further with any of you deciding on the same programs!

 

[sheamusthegreatkhali]

In a similar dilemma and exact same scenario OMG!