COMPARE TOP 3 MFE programs in terms of Placement?
- Thread starter zshaonan
- Start date
i just graduated from princeton dickhead. just trying to be pc. anyway, a totally honest and comprehensive answer would be (and you won't get any better answer than this): princeton has the best placements, and then right behind princeton are cmu, nyu, columbia, mit, stanford, and berkeley. as i said before, i would pick columbia and stanford (and berkeley, now that i think about it) if i had to pick, but it's pretty even among all of them. right after those are cornell, chicago, baruch, and then a few others
called on it? dude your "calling me on it" consisted of accusing me of guessing about princeton's placement. well since i personally know every single person from the program and where every single person was placed, turns out your accusation was baseless and you more than deserve the appellation dickhead
Bendheim should add a class on class, it seems.
But, just for the sake of pointing out the obvious, you're also an expert on all the other programs...how, exactly?
This is why people called you out; you put something forth as fact while knowing very little. Mayhaps you would do well to read taleb's take on overconfidence?
Quick...call me something vulgar! Just continues to prove my point.
But, just for the sake of pointing out the obvious, you're also an expert on all the other programs...how, exactly?
This is why people called you out; you put something forth as fact while knowing very little. Mayhaps you would do well to read taleb's take on overconfidence?
Quick...call me something vulgar! Just continues to prove my point.
- Joined
- 5/2/06
- Messages
- 12,276
- Points
- 273
That is not how you represent gentlemen of Princeton. Even if you are factually correct, you don't win arguments by that.
I'm actually very interested in your comprehensive answer. Do you happen to know latest placement of all the programs you list (specially of interest are NYU, Columbia, Stanford)?
If you do, mind to list them all here using the same reporting methodology so you can put to rest all the doubters?
DominiConnor
Quant Headhunter
- Joined
- 9/6/06
- Messages
- 1,051
- Points
- 93
Bluechimp's bang on the money about quality of placements and even my database doesn't answer that question properly so I am very interested in RolledUpAces comments. Maybe there is some database or survey but mildly diligent research by my firm has failed to locate it.
I'd be really grateful if RolledUpAces could share why he/she feels so sure about the numbers and quality ?
"Quality" is viciously hard to do objectively. You can't just say "this a is tier 1 firm so it's a good job", nor do entry level job titles tell you very much, indeed job titles in general are poor predictors of anything.
You'd need someone who understood the market to contact alumni and ask them what they did.
I also find it quite odd that Georgia "loses track" of alumni.
US universities have a well earned reputation for excellence in managing the relationship with alumni, some British and European schools don't even have a proper list, whereas American ones have dedicated staff and often well funded departments.
A good proxy for quality is pay. An Excel jockey banging out mundane reports may be called a "quantitative analyst" which sounds better than "associate in risk management" but they may be identical jobs, pay will tell you the difference, but even then you'd need some skill to interpret the results.
My firm has been spending real money on discriminating the variables that affect career paths and even we don't entirely trust the results we get out,but P&D have the luxury of complete objectivity, which is ironic given that myself and Paul Wilmott who founded the firm have commercial interests in this space, and the space of "placement reports" is so fouled that we're very reluctant to enter it at all.
I have reached the point where I simply don't believe the reports, they certainly don't mesh all that well with the vast global pay survey we're undertaking or my experience.
Most here have done stats to an adequate level, so step back and apply a bit of intuition.
There must be some distribution amongst the various MFE schools about quality, and you could impose some sort of ordering function.
It follows that there must be schools at the top end, middle and bottom of the distribution. Saying X is 2.3% better than Y is of course not achievable, but you ought to be able to do deciles, or at the very least quartiles.
No you can't.
I'm being facetious.
From the data emitted by the schools, they are pretty much all in the top decile, which is quite a trick, but if a professor or financial mathematics tells me, a humble headhunter, that he's achieved that for his school, who am I to argue ?
I'd be really grateful if RolledUpAces could share why he/she feels so sure about the numbers and quality ?
"Quality" is viciously hard to do objectively. You can't just say "this a is tier 1 firm so it's a good job", nor do entry level job titles tell you very much, indeed job titles in general are poor predictors of anything.
You'd need someone who understood the market to contact alumni and ask them what they did.
I also find it quite odd that Georgia "loses track" of alumni.
US universities have a well earned reputation for excellence in managing the relationship with alumni, some British and European schools don't even have a proper list, whereas American ones have dedicated staff and often well funded departments.
A good proxy for quality is pay. An Excel jockey banging out mundane reports may be called a "quantitative analyst" which sounds better than "associate in risk management" but they may be identical jobs, pay will tell you the difference, but even then you'd need some skill to interpret the results.
My firm has been spending real money on discriminating the variables that affect career paths and even we don't entirely trust the results we get out,but P&D have the luxury of complete objectivity, which is ironic given that myself and Paul Wilmott who founded the firm have commercial interests in this space, and the space of "placement reports" is so fouled that we're very reluctant to enter it at all.
I have reached the point where I simply don't believe the reports, they certainly don't mesh all that well with the vast global pay survey we're undertaking or my experience.
Most here have done stats to an adequate level, so step back and apply a bit of intuition.
There must be some distribution amongst the various MFE schools about quality, and you could impose some sort of ordering function.
It follows that there must be schools at the top end, middle and bottom of the distribution. Saying X is 2.3% better than Y is of course not achievable, but you ought to be able to do deciles, or at the very least quartiles.
No you can't.
I'm being facetious.
From the data emitted by the schools, they are pretty much all in the top decile, which is quite a trick, but if a professor or financial mathematics tells me, a humble headhunter, that he's achieved that for his school, who am I to argue ?
Very nice to have your perspective!
Baruch's MFE clearly posts internship and employment statistics, including pay--which you mention as possibly a good proxy for the true nature of the job, over for example job titles and company names.
Internship stats are here:
http://mfe.baruch.cuny.edu/internship-stats/
Employment stats are here:
http://mfe.baruch.cuny.edu/employment-stats/
Could I ask you to comment on these? One of Baruch's loudest drums is its claim to transparency, which personally I laud...your take on this would be most interesting.
Paul Mithouard
NYU MSMF
- Joined
- 1/11/11
- Messages
- 83
- Points
- 18
If Baruch's Placements & Statistics are as transparents as you imply, why do you need any comment on them?
Are you really asking for insights, or are you just making some basic advertising?
If you'd care to read the rest of the thread, you will see an emerging theme that raw placement numbers can mean nothing, and can be misleading. Dominic made the observation that salary may be a more accurate proxy to the nature of the job placement. I asked him to comment on Baruch's placement statistics, which includes salary figures.
And no, I am not advertising. Like yourself, I am a prospective student--however, I do not broadcast all over this forum about my choices, unlike yourself-- I see you chose Baruch, then changed your mind to choose Columbia, and now you haven chosen NYU. It all looks good on your Facebook updates and to impress your friends--but this is the week your bank balance takes that hit and reality starts to sink in.
- Joined
- 9/5/10
- Messages
- 397
- Points
- 38
Quantnet members are getting more and more aggressive/defensive lately...Don't know why!!!
- Joined
- 5/25/10
- Messages
- 417
- Points
- 53
- Joined
- 9/5/10
- Messages
- 397
- Points
- 38
Peter, I was an associate at a BB investment bank in 2006-2008...and I was raised and lived most my life in the Middle-East...so, this is considered LOVE compared to what I have been through...
Still, in the last few weeks, the posts have become more and more defensive...compared to what they were in September, when I joined.
Still, in the last few weeks, the posts have become more and more defensive...compared to what they were in September, when I joined.
- Joined
- 1/28/11
- Messages
- 161
- Points
- 38
Peter, I was an associate at a BB investment bank in 2006-2008...and I was raised and lived most my life in the Middle-East...so, this is considered LOVE compared to what I have been through...
Still, in the last few weeks, the posts have become more and more defensive...compared to what they were in September, when I joined.
It's Summer! :P
- Joined
- 5/25/10
- Messages
- 417
- Points
- 53
That's actually a very good point, believe it or not.
- Joined
- 9/5/10
- Messages
- 397
- Points
- 38
I was going to suggest that...Chill-out people. Turn the AC on...PLEASE.
Paul Mithouard, I am sorry for my post...it was uncalled for.
Despite the appearances that this forum (Quantnet) is generally pro-Baruch and anti-Columbia...I am not cheering for one camp or the other. I am not associated with Quantnet either.
My question was directed at DominicConnor, in light of what he said about salary being a more accurate indicator of job/internship placement. His comment struck me as highly sensible and logical. As far as I could find out, only Baruch MFE seems to have posted this information. I am not taking sides, I am stating a fact. And I was asking DominicConnor if he could comment on his impressions of Baruch's published salaries.
If someone can point me to where other programs have published salaries, I would be delighted to retract my post.
And yes, the temperature is 39C with 89% humidity on top.
Despite the appearances that this forum (Quantnet) is generally pro-Baruch and anti-Columbia...I am not cheering for one camp or the other. I am not associated with Quantnet either.
My question was directed at DominicConnor, in light of what he said about salary being a more accurate indicator of job/internship placement. His comment struck me as highly sensible and logical. As far as I could find out, only Baruch MFE seems to have posted this information. I am not taking sides, I am stating a fact. And I was asking DominicConnor if he could comment on his impressions of Baruch's published salaries.
If someone can point me to where other programs have published salaries, I would be delighted to retract my post.
And yes, the temperature is 39C with 89% humidity on top.
http://www.orie.cornell.edu/orie/brochures/upload/Cornell_ORIE_MEng_Info_Nov_2010.pdf
Slide #44. There is an updated version with salaries from the past 2 years upon request.
- Joined
- 1/28/11
- Messages
- 161
- Points
- 38
Similar threads
