COMPARE Columbia MFE vs MIT MFin

[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!

 

[Bob Tyson]

Hi all,

I am a risk analyst from a BB bank in India, having completed almost eight months of full time work experience. I graduated in electrical engineering from a top 10 college in India and have acceptances from Columbia MSFE and MIT MFin.

I am really puzzled as to what should I choose or whether should I continue to work and then apply for an MBA later. My goal is to work in IBD or consulting. If lucky I would like to move to Venture Capital / Private Equity in the future or transition from my IBD / Consulting job to the industry at a mid management position (for ex. if I am consulting for the FMCG sector then join an FMCG company etc.). One thing for sure is that I do not want to be involved in risk management for long - be it as a risk analyst in a bank or as a financial risk management consultant.

Which brings me to my dilemma - Which of the programs - MIT or Columbia can help me get closer to my career goals ? I am open to working in USA / Singapore / EMEA on completing my masters degree. Or should I continue to work in my current back office job and hope for a transition post MBA ?

MIT has the business school name in its favor and the relevant coursework needed for my career interests. But the program is not that old. Columbia is much older and well known and has the location advantage, but MSFE as a degree might not be very IBD / Consulting savvy. MBA as a degree has more recognition but I am not sure how much will my pre-MBA back office experience help me in getting the jobs I would like.

Another big question is that IBD / Consulting is very very competitive to get into, does the resume of a guy like me have the potential to get shortlisted for IBD / Consulting jobs - either through Columbia or MIT ?

Appreciate any help on my dilemma on MIT / Columbia / future MBA. Thanks so much guys for all your help !

 

[GoIllini]

If you want to do consulting or banking, MIT is the best choice. That said, I know of a few structurers who got into banking with an MFE.

I've worked with a lot of Indian born and educated programmers and their ability to communicate and connect with people in English varies greatly. Some of them struggle to pronounce consonants; others speak with a near flawless accent. The ones who have thick accents will not be able to succeed in banking in a country like the US or UK. America and the UK are pretty open-minded countries about race and culture, but to succeed in a high-touch field like consulting or banking, you need to be able to fit in well with the culture. You need to be able to talk about (American) Football and grab a beer with folks. In some ways this is a lot like a sales role.

You have two good choices here, but Columbia gives you better fallback options to become a quant or work in HFT. My vote is for MIT, but only if your English is excellent.

 

[Bob Tyson]

Thanks a lot for your reply ! I really appreciate your advice. ^_^

 

[TraderJoe]

I would advise you to go to MIT. They are already arranging a no-cosigner loan for you so your risk is zero. Then get five years experience. Then get an MBA from H/S/W/Booth/Sloan. Again, they will arrange a no-cosigner loan for you so that your risk is zero. The most important thing about the MIT degree is that you will become a part of the Sloan alumni network. You will not realize the importance of this intangible benefit at least for the next 5-7 years.
To give you a good example of how this works, you can see Satya Nadella. He started out in a technical role, then he got Booth MBA, then he switched to Management role, now he is CEO of Microsoft with $18 million salary.

 

[Bob Tyson]

Thank you so much for your reply TraderJoe. Really appreciate it. And yes, the Nadella story is a great inspiration indeed .

Then get an MBA from H/S/W/Booth/Sloan

I am sure that I will have to land a very prestigious job on completion of my MFin - something like MBB / Goldman / JP / MS etc. My concern really is that what are my odds of getting this job in the first place once I complete my MFin. I am in risk management at a BB bank right now and I am sure HSW / Chicago / Sloan / Columbia do not prefer such candidates for the MBA class. Any insights / advice on this ? Thank you so much.

 

[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

 

[Bowenvan]

I am a fourth-year civil engineering student from Canada.
I got admitted to the master of finance program at MIT(12-month, kind of sad but life cannot give you everything) and the MSFE program at Columbia University.
I have been to both New York City and Boston. I love Boston way more than New York. I am from Vancouver, and I really appreciate the quietness and the sense of community.
After graduation, I want to work on global development, project management and resource allocation on infrastructure projects. I feel like that the MIT program is a better fit for me.
I can do some programming, but I prefer talking to people. I get talkative sometimes.
But most of my friends recommend the MSFE program from Columbia. According to them, it is a better program(I guess, for quant analyst?) Also, it seems that Columbia has a unparalleled placement record.

 

[volmacro]

After graduation, I want to work on global development, project management and resource allocation on infrastructure projects. I feel like that the MIT program is a better fit for me.

Seems like MIT would be a better fit if you're aiming to do something less quantitatively heavy after graduation. MIT's curriculum is more broad, kind of like a CFA program, and may be better suited to the more varied nature of the work you're interested in. Columbia's is way more focused on quant skills and placing quant positions. I also think MIT's program would have more clubs and courses focused on emerging markets, which would go along with your interest in global development.

 

[Bowenvan]

Seems like MIT would be a better fit if you're aiming to do something less quantitatively heavy after graduation. MIT's curriculum is more broad, kind of like a CFA program, and may be better suited to the more varied nature of the work you're interested in. Columbia's is way more focused on quant skills and placing quant positions. I also think MIT's program would have more clubs and courses focused on emerging markets, which would go along with your interest in global development.

Yes. That's exactly what I am thinking. I am trying to get in touch with MFin students at MIT, and talk to my professors.

 

[Rafael F]

Columbia Financial Engineering or Financial Economics?

 

[Bowenvan]

Columbia Financial Engineering or Financial Economics?

I got admitted into Financial Engineering. If it was Financial Economics, there would be no hesitation for me to go there.

 

[Rafael F]

I got admitted into Financial Engineering. If it was Financial Economics, there would be no hesitation for me to go there.

By "there" you mean Columbia right?

 

[Rafael F]

I am a fourth-year civil engineering student from Canada.
I got admitted to the master of finance program at MIT(12-month, kind of sad but life cannot give you everything) and the MSFE program at Columbia University.
I have been to both New York City and Boston. I love Boston way more than New York. I am from Vancouver, and I really appreciate the quietness and the sense of community.
After graduation, I want to work on global development, project management and resource allocation on infrastructure projects. I feel like that the MIT program is a better fit for me.
I can do some programming, but I prefer talking to people. I get talkative sometimes.
But most of my friends recommend the MSFE program from Columbia. According to them, it is a better program(I guess, for quant analyst?) Also, it seems that Columbia has a unparalleled placement record.

Where did you end up going?

 

[Bowenvan]

I am going to MIT.

 

[codebreaker]

Hard to decide which one is better. I am not necessarily work in quant in future. Could anyone provide some suggestions? Thanks.