Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I think MIT MFin probably wins over MAFN (not MSFE). The MAFN has a lot of part time students, and a lot of folks trying to get from IT into S&T. I still think it's a great program and Columbia is a great school in general, but the MAFN gets a little too diluted.What about Columbia MAFN vs. Mit MFIN?
I think MIT MFin probably wins over MAFN (not MSFE). The MAFN has a lot of part time students, and a lot of folks trying to get from IT into S&T. I still think it's a great program and Columbia is a great school in general, but the MAFN gets a little too diluted.
As much as I like to claim that prestige doesn't matter and that we work in a competence-based field, the truth is that it matters for getting interviews, even as a quant. I still have an old recruiting handbook from a now-defunct large Wall Street bank. In their section where they explain how they evaluate candidates and consider differences in schools, the main feature is selectivity. How many students apply to the program and how many get in? My understanding is that MIT MFin is more selective than Columbia MAFN.
I believe MIT gets you out a year earlier, too, and saves you a little on tuition money. Given all of these features, I think MIT is the clear winner against Columbia MAFN.
Again, for IEOR or MSFE, MIT is no longer the clear winner. Both programs beat MIT handily if you're pretty sure you want to be a quant.
Hey, I was an econ undergrad at Columbia College and took the into Math of Finance class taught by Prof. Smirnov about three years ago. It was (is?) one of the 10 classes in the MAFN program. I also took Prof. Brodie's class in IEOR and audited Prof. Derman's class on the Volatility Smile.
The MAFN program is really good but really theoretical. Especially the stochastic methods in finance class (a 6000-level class) has a lot of proofs you're expected to understand and apply to other proofs (e.g. Fubini, Borel-Cantelli I and II and other limit theorems). I was in that class for a few weeks but bailed after the first homework assignment. MFE classes are a bit more accessible, and getting practice in Matlab and R was very helpful for my current job.
I was lucky to get into an S&T rotational program after college and now work as an analyst at a fixed income hedge fund in Connecticut. I'm looking into the evening programs- MAFN, Courant and Tepper.
The MAFN class was about 50% French if I had to guess. Columbia has an exchange program with some top French engineering schools so I think those kids get a master's from Columbia and a master's from their French school. I don't even know if they apply formally or have to take the GRE or even pay Columbia tuition. I do know they are very good at math, stats and programming. The MFE program has more Chinese and Indian students, but a lot of French as well. What was interesting is that American students are probably 10% of the MAFN (like 4 or 5 students) and even less in the MFE.
I'm not sure if this has changed, but MAFN used to have about 40 full-time students and 20 new part-time students every year. I met a few of the part-time guys- one guy was on an HFT desk at Goldman (Indian guy) and another guy was on an HFT desk at Credit Suisse (Chinese guy). Very sharp guys obviously. And believe it or not, there was a managing director in derivatives trading from a BB, like a 40 year old guy. I guess he did engineering as an undergrad and rose through the ranks but now as a manager, he wanted to learn/refresh some quant finance topics.
All my info is from 2010-2011, so things might be different under the new director.
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.
lower competence/asshole ratio
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.