I have the option of getting a five year BS and Masters. The BS is in quantitative finance, and the Masters would be in Financial Engineering. Would spending the extra year and getting the MFE increase my chances at getting an offer at quant HF, or even top quant prop trading shops?
MFE right after undergrad?
- Thread starter carlfox
- Start date
- Joined
- 4/2/12
- Messages
- 851
- Points
- 353
I'd be careful about pigeon holing yourself with an undergrad like that. Something more versatile will give you options at graduation, whereas that will be hard to leverage into other industries. You're young, you have no idea where your interests may lie in 5 years, and no idea where the finance industry will be then either. Just my 2 pennies
I'm doing the degree because I genuinely find it interesting, I tried math and engineering and I had no interest in it. I'm not trying to go after money, I have an actual interest in it. My classes could also be used for corporate finance, or consulting so I don't feel that I'm stuck.
- Joined
- 5/27/11
- Messages
- 184
- Points
- 38
So you don't like MATH and still you want to go for a MFE?
Carlfox,
Making these choices this early sounds like good planning, but is actually frivolous. College changed my perceptions and all math and physics grads in my degree turned out as individuals.
I don't mean to be rude, but it's sounds like you have an example of "Johnny down the road" syndrome, where you say "Johnny down the road did MFE and became a quant, therefore if I do that I will become a quant". That's the way Med and a small minority of degrees work. The way it works is that you do something you like and then start looking at the market as you leave, as markets will have moved on. Pitching yourself in a degree that has loads of options is also equally frivolous as if none of those appeal you're also screwed.
Thing about MFE is that you not only get limited options but alternatives are limited - many non-finance employers balk when they see MFE on a CV because they know before interview that you're using them to find a "gap job". Back in the day one would get a pub job (as I did) and keep applying for quant jobs. Also even when you get in, finance is the classic specialised job - well paid but as soon as things go wrong you can find yourself in an unemployable situation as you'll have no transferable skills to get into another profession. Many business bankers can get around this, but you never hear in the press about the maths guys that struggle as it goes against the media stereotype of bankers, but there's tons of them out there and even before the credit crunch there were plenty of math guys struggling.
And finally, don't do math in uni unless it's Ivy League or foreign equivalent. The difference is far more than reputation - many my MFE course weren't able to hack it having done maths and physics at schools that were below par and quant employers will know this. Also, you need top people skills to survive - many quants don't and get kicked out of industry or leaving due to stress within 5-10 years.
Making these choices this early sounds like good planning, but is actually frivolous. College changed my perceptions and all math and physics grads in my degree turned out as individuals.
I don't mean to be rude, but it's sounds like you have an example of "Johnny down the road" syndrome, where you say "Johnny down the road did MFE and became a quant, therefore if I do that I will become a quant". That's the way Med and a small minority of degrees work. The way it works is that you do something you like and then start looking at the market as you leave, as markets will have moved on. Pitching yourself in a degree that has loads of options is also equally frivolous as if none of those appeal you're also screwed.
Thing about MFE is that you not only get limited options but alternatives are limited - many non-finance employers balk when they see MFE on a CV because they know before interview that you're using them to find a "gap job". Back in the day one would get a pub job (as I did) and keep applying for quant jobs. Also even when you get in, finance is the classic specialised job - well paid but as soon as things go wrong you can find yourself in an unemployable situation as you'll have no transferable skills to get into another profession. Many business bankers can get around this, but you never hear in the press about the maths guys that struggle as it goes against the media stereotype of bankers, but there's tons of them out there and even before the credit crunch there were plenty of math guys struggling.
And finally, don't do math in uni unless it's Ivy League or foreign equivalent. The difference is far more than reputation - many my MFE course weren't able to hack it having done maths and physics at schools that were below par and quant employers will know this. Also, you need top people skills to survive - many quants don't and get kicked out of industry or leaving due to stress within 5-10 years.
I think Liam's post is quite off the mark. I know of many colleagues who did Math or Engineering outside an Ivy (or foreign equivalent) and are successful. In fact, I can't recall any of my acquaintances who did Math or Engineering in the US (regardless of school) and is not successful by the metrics of career track and compensation. The only reason I say 'Math or Engineering' is that not that many people do math; but I know of at least half a dozen people who did non-Ivy Math and they're doing fine.
Having loads of options, none of which appeal to you because you are picky is a big difference from the cases of liberal arts majors or lawyers that are presented in the press because many of these people do not have loads of related but not 'relevant fit' options. The only way the above makes sense is if your only idea of success is being called a 'Quant' at a BB and if that's the case, good luck to you.
Having loads of options, none of which appeal to you because you are picky is a big difference from the cases of liberal arts majors or lawyers that are presented in the press because many of these people do not have loads of related but not 'relevant fit' options. The only way the above makes sense is if your only idea of success is being called a 'Quant' at a BB and if that's the case, good luck to you.
- Joined
- 7/25/10
- Messages
- 862
- Points
- 38
Agreed re: undergrad Math degree. An undergraduate degree in Mathematics is one of the best you can get because it prepares you for a wide variety of Graduate programs (from Economics to Physics to Computer Science to MFE) and also makes you quite employable; most skills are learned on the job and to employers a math degree demonstrates your ability to reason and learn complex subjects. Additionally, undergraduate math is quite canonical. This means that while the reputation of your institution has some bearing on the quality of the material you're being taught, it is quite low. Don't be afraid to do an undergrad in math, it's quite a pleasurable experience.
- Joined
- 7/25/10
- Messages
- 862
- Points
- 38
- Joined
- 2/26/11
- Messages
- 52
- Points
- 18
Math without proof is akin to music without sounds. one misses the beauty. Any math degree worth is salt will require you to do at least the most basic course in Real Analysis. It is hard to claim one did a math degree if there were no proof classes involved. If you don't like the proof aspect of the degree, you might reconsider your academic career alignment.
Similar threads
