COMPARE Carnegie Mellon University MSCF vs MIT MFin

[LisaC]

Hi everyone!

I hope you are starting to hear back from programs you have been waiting for and get enough sleep during this stressful period. I was fortunate enough to receive admissions to both CMU MSCF and MIT MFin, and I had a hard time deciding between them. I would genuinely appreciate it if you could provide some insights on the two programs.

Some background about me: studied math + econ in my undergrad, no full time experience. International student, will need sponsorship. My goal is to 1) get a quant job in the US right after master’s graduation. 2) ideally QR in AM (or sell-side banks if I can’t get any in AM)

Some information I have collected:

• Reputation & alum network: CMU has a better reputation in quant (?correct me if I was wrong) but MIT has a bigger name overall. CMU has more alums in quant, while MIT Sloan is well connected in the broader finance industry.
  • Although my short term goal is to do quant in the US, I am not sure if I will go back to APAC or pivot to other industries in the long term. CMU seems to fit me better now, while MIT might provide more possibilities in the longer term? But I don't know if the school name still matters after I work for a couple of years.
• Employment statistics: CMU has better placement rate, both in terms of percentage of grad students getting full time job right after graduation, and percentage of people landing a US job
  • However, this might be biased, because some MIT students go to ibd or other non-quant jobs after graduation, and it’s hard to land an ibd job in the US as a master’s grad. Since I aim for quant, it makes more sense to only compare both programs’ quant placement. MIT didn’t provide more detailed information, maybe someone from the program can provide more insights?
  • Same bias exist in salary?
• Career Service: People say CMU has better career services, and I know it only serves the MSCF program. For MIT, I’m not sure if MFin gets its own career service team or not, also if resources at Sloan would lean to MBA or other MS programs or not. (Maybe you can answer)
• Curriculum: CMU is intense and MIT is more flexible. Some say CMU curriculum is “unnecessarily hard”, while MIT has some finance requirement courses that students don’t find useful. Not sure which is better for me, because I do need a hard-core curriculum to improve my skill sets, but also afraid of no time to look for a job.
• Competition within school: Not many people have talked about this, but one MIT alum told me other master’s programs in CMU might also recruit for quant, while in MIT, MFin is the only master’s program that recruits for quant, so less peer competitions within MIT. (Didn’t count PhDs, because we are not in the same pool?)
• Location: Minor point. My CMU program is in NYC, more job opportunities & worse living environment. MIT is in Boston, more AM companies(?) but overall less jobs. I’ve lived in Boston for half year before, really like the environment there.

I would greatly appreciate it if you could provide any additional information to help me make decision, even if it's a small or obvious one. I particularly want to learn more about MIT's US placement rate in quant. Thank you so much for taking time to read this.

 

[weab]

CMU MSCF is superior in quant, your best shot is choosing CMU. I am only concerned of the difference between NY / Pittsburgh location (I would choose main campus). Also MS school brand is a fraction of worth compared to undergrad, not that CMU has no brand. CMU curriculum is also better for quant.

 

[LisaC]

CMU MSCF is superior in quant, your best shot is choosing CMU. I am only concerned of the difference between NY / Pittsburgh location (I would choose main campus). Also MS school brand is a fraction of worth compared to undergrad, not that CMU has no brand. CMU curriculum is also better for quant.

Thanks! You are right that undergrad school brand matters more. I chose CMU NY location for more in-person networking & interview opportunities, but I've heard there's no big difference between the two locations.

 

[drakaron]

CMU is better imo

 

[quantchoices]

Is there a difference between Pittsburgh and NY? And is it more competitive for either campuses?

 

[LisaC]

Is there a difference between Pittsburgh and NY? And is it more competitive for either campuses?

According to my research and replies from other posts, professors stay more in Pitts and industry practitioners are more approachable in NY. The enrollment is roughly half-half in both campuses and the admission team said no difference in their admission bar.

 

[gokuVegeta]

Hey I saw similar threads before but they were either old or not very informative. I recently got accepted into both programs and am in a serious dilemma as to which one to choose. I come from computer science background, and want to work as quant trader or analyst in the future. Currently I just have 1 software internship experience so I will need help of the career services to help me pivot to finance sector. Here are my views on the programs -

MIT Pros -
1) Very big brand name
2) Boston is better located in terms of industry outreach as compared to Pittsburgh
3) "MIT" name can open doors for me in Asia and Europe as well as its more internationally recognized
4) The courses are more finance heavy, less math

MIT Cons -
1) The career services tailor more to MBA students, not too much to MFin
2) Average salary and placement is lesser than CMU
3) Higher tuition

CMU Pros -
1) Highly regarded in industry
2) Stellar career services (as far as I have read online)
3) A good mix of math, finance and programming courses in curriculum
4) Higher average salary and ranked higher than MIT.

CMU Cons -
1) It's in Pittsburgh, so far from NYC - finance hub.
2) Not a big name for finance as it is mostly known for CS

Please give me your views and if anyone goes to these programs, I would highly appreciate your inputs.

 

[knightinberlin]

Why would you wanna go to MIT if they don't prioritise you for career services even after all what you have achieved? As an international student, that should be the first point of comparison I think.

If I had both admits, I would have instantly put my deposit for CMU cause its a computational finance degree. If you wish to work in the US for couple of years, or even abroad, a tech-heavy Master's is quite useful (which CMU provides).

Also, seeing you've done undergrad in CS, isn't that better? You would have an opportunity to do a Ph.D. in computational finance and also to break into a quantitative finance role in the industry. That's my take.

I think in the end it might come down to your essay - which one is the most authentic version.

Congratulations on both admits btw!

 

[the_bolt_the_lightning_the_thunder]

MIT’s reputation and prestige lie in their undergrad and PhD programs, not their professional master degrees. 100% CMU unless you think you might want to do traditional finance.

 

[Andy Nguyen]

Global brandname recognition may not be as relevant when it comes to super niche field such quant finance.
There are lesser known universes that offer top programs in certain disciplines.
Many people have a preference for brand names which is understandable especially in certain parts of the world.
We have plenty of examples here over the years where people picked the brand name over the quality and better employment outcome from other programs. The results have not been pretty.
This is just a caution to have clear objective when you do this type of degree. You are paying to get the relevant training for your target job, with a dedicated career service and good alumni network and life long support. All of the above should result in helping you get the jobs you want. Brand name is a nice perk but don’t overpay for it.