Software Engineering Job at Tech Firm vs. Bank

[Sailor Sam]

Hi everyone,

I have a question about which entry level job could help me grow my career. Would it be better to work as a software engineer at a large tech firm (think Google, Amazon, Apple, etc.) and then springboard into quantitative finance (which is the ultimate goal), or work in technology in finance (think JPMorgan, Goldman, etc.) and then springboard into quant finance.

Please let me know your thoughts! This may seem obvious, but I think the technical challenges I could potentially face at the tech firms could look more attractive to potential future employers. But then again, I would get great experience working for a bank that is actually relevant to the industry.

 

[Keith Tan]

neither. take a look at a typical quant finance role:

Requirements:
• Junior/entry level Quant’s – less than 3 years’ experience post academia
• An excellent quantitative PhD/MSc from a top school in a very quant focused thesis: Applied Mathematics, Theoretical Physics, Statistics & Probability, Electrical Engineering, Financial Engineering etc
• Strong communicative skills
• Experience with C# is highly desired
• Confidence with a strong numerative background
• Highly ambitious
• Real desire to break into the quantitative analytics world

1. quant finance can do without software engineers. point 2 above can do without a CS degree.
2. software engineers are automatically labelled as not having quant skills and will be passed on for quant candidates.
3. quant finance is about relevant experience. if you do get into quant finance it could be another entry-level role
4. amazing software engineers go on to work on great products. quant finance will no longer be of interest.

 

[Peter Wagner]

A great many quant roles require excellent software development skills. You need to be able to execute your ideas/models. I am currently working on several roles at different banks, and recent candidate rejections have been due to lack of adequate software development skills. These are some of the top groups at top banks, so the bar is high for all skills.

 

[m_ch]

@Keith Tan, you are saying CS majors are not seen as sufficiently qualified in terms of ''quantitative thinking/analysis'' skills? Can you expand on what you're trying to say?

 

[Peter Wagner]

No, I'm responding to the previous post that said, " quant finance can do without software engineers. point 2 above can do without a CS degree." You don't need a degree in any of it, but you do need to be good at all of it.

 

[Keith Tan]

CS holders aspiring to be a quant requires all of these critical topics indepth: stochastic processes, bayesian methods, linear modeling, time series analysis, econometrics, ARCH GARCH HARCH modeling, nonlinearity, multivariate analysis and more...

 

[Keith Tan]

A great many quant roles require excellent software development skills. You need to be able to execute your ideas/models. I am currently working on several roles at different banks, and recent candidate rejections have been due to lack of adequate software development skills. These are some of the top groups at top banks, so the bar is high for all skills.

hi Peter, quant people are like "superman" of finance, they need to be amazingly good at everything. how often do you come across these supermans? do they actually exist (or pop up in your inbox every day or so)?

 

[Peter Wagner]

CS holders aspiring to be a quant requires all of these critical topics indepth: stochastic processes, bayesian methods, linear modeling, time series analysis, econometrics, ARCH GARCH HARCH modeling, nonlinearity, multivariate analysis and more...

Exactly right.

 

[Daniel Duffy]

@Keith Tan, you are saying CS majors are not seen as sufficiently qualified in terms of ''quantitative thinking/analysis'' skills? Can you expand on what you're trying to say?

The average CS education - however good otherwise - is low on maths content in general. For me, CS is an application of Maths.

 

[m_ch]

The average CS education - however good otherwise - is low on maths content in general. For me, CS is an application of Maths.

Thank you for your input.

A question for you and everyone else here: what bachelor's degree would you recommend someone pursue for your ''typical'' quant position: pure math, applied math, stats, (was going to put CS on that list but now I don't think it would come as an answer, unless we are talking about HFT positions)?

Obviously I know not all quant positions are the same so it is hard to generalize, and there is no ''perfect'' or ''right'' choice, but say someone was indifferent between those and just wanted to keep the most doors open, which would you pick?

 

[mhy]

The average CS education - however good otherwise - is low on maths content in general. For me, CS is an application of Maths.

Which is why I minored in Math...!

Also this varies a lot. Some schools make you take quite a heavy load of mathematics as part of the CS curriculum, and others will let you get away with barely touching basic linear algebra or probability. I was lucky enough to take linear algebra, calculus-based probability and statistics, discrete mathematics, combinatorics, mathematical modeling, and of course multivariate calculus. The next steps I guess would be ODE/PDE, game theory, maybe some kind of analysis course. I think once one has done calculus and calculus-based probability/statistics, the road is wide open to learn differential equations and 'higher-level' statistics.

 

[Daniel Duffy]

Which is why I minored in Math...!

Also this varies a lot. Some schools make you take quite a heavy load of mathematics as part of the CS curriculum, and others will let you get away with barely touching basic linear algebra or probability. I was lucky enough to take linear algebra, calculus-based probability and statistics, discrete mathematics, combinatorics, mathematical modeling, and of course multivariate calculus. The next steps I guess would be ODE/PDE, game theory, maybe some kind of analysis course. I think once one has done calculus and calculus-based probability/statistics, the road is wide open to learn differential equations and 'higher-level' statistics.

Applied and numerical analysis/methods are always useful. At the end of the day computational finance is not too dissimilar to applied numerical analysis. (or at least, a big overlap).

 

[GoIllini]

Hi everyone,

I have a question about which entry level job could help me grow my career. Would it be better to work as a software engineer at a large tech firm (think Google, Amazon, Apple, etc.) and then springboard into quantitative finance (which is the ultimate goal), or work in technology in finance (think JPMorgan, Goldman, etc.) and then springboard into quant finance.

Please let me know your thoughts! This may seem obvious, but I think the technical challenges I could potentially face at the tech firms could look more attractive to potential future employers. But then again, I would get great experience working for a bank that is actually relevant to the industry.

At an established tech firm you will be working on a specific aspect of a specific problem. Projects will run for months. There will be a lot of testing. At Google, you're cruising along in a Cadillac convertible; the top is down, life is a breeze.

In finance, projects run for 48, maybe 72 hours. You spend a day and a half developing and half a day testing. Then it goes to production. And you get to see every aspect of your project. There is more of this sense that you're on a Ducati 848 on a track, you're coming into every curve with two miles per hour of traction to spare. As you are hitting the end of each curve you feel the rear wheel starting to slip and you desperately apply more throttle to try and get through the curve. Traders need stuff done yesterday, they scream when stuff breaks, and you have to balance getting stuff out now with a 10% chance that it breaks the whole system vs. getting stuff out at EOD when you can test it. (I'm a conservative guy and almost always wait until EOD unless something is already breaking.)

As a developer at an i-bank, you are an island on the trading floor in a sea of traders and salespeople. At a tech firm, you're surrounded by geeks, Level 20 Clerics in D&D, and Star Trek fans.

Two different kinds of jobs.

It's a lot of fun, but if you value heart health, I would not want to be a Desk Strategist for more than 4-5 years, or be one past the age of ~35.

CS + Engineering Mathematics (Calc I-III, Linear Algebra, Diff.EQs, Probability) sets you up extremely well for a graduate degree, and it might even be enough to become a quant if you have just a little more math background. But I would not *count* on becoming a quant straight out of undergrad.

 

[GoIllini]

CS holders aspiring to be a quant requires all of these critical topics indepth: stochastic processes, bayesian methods, linear modeling, time series analysis, econometrics, ARGH OUCH modeling, nonlinearity, multivariate analysis and more...

Fixed that for you.

 

[Qing Li]

At an established tech firm you will be working on a specific aspect of a specific problem. Projects will run for months. There will be a lot of testing. At Google, you're cruising along in a Cadillac convertible; the top is down, life is a breeze.

In finance, projects run for 48, maybe 72 hours. You spend a day and a half developing and half a day testing. Then it goes to production. And you get to see every aspect of your project. There is more of this sense that you're on a Ducati 848 on a track, you're coming into every curve with two miles per hour of traction to spare. As you are hitting the end of each curve you feel the rear wheel starting to slip and you desperately apply more throttle to try and get through the curve. Traders need stuff done yesterday, they scream when stuff breaks, and you have to balance getting stuff out now with a 10% chance that it breaks the whole system vs. getting stuff out at EOD when you can test it. (I'm a conservative guy and almost always wait until EOD unless something is already breaking.)

As a developer at an i-bank, you are an island on the trading floor in a sea of traders and salespeople. At a tech firm, you're surrounded by geeks, Level 20 Clerics in D&D, and Star Trek fans.

Two different kinds of jobs.

It's a lot of fun, but if you value heart health, I would not want to be a Desk Strategist for more than 4-5 years, or be one past the age of ~35.

CS + Engineering Mathematics (Calc I-III, Linear Algebra, Diff.EQs, Probability) sets you up extremely well for a graduate degree, and it might even be enough to become a quant if you have just a little more math background. But I would not *count* on becoming a quant straight out of undergrad.

Then, is it decent to say that in the I-banking, the quant jobs are more intensive and more rewarding than the software engineers in the tech firms?