- Joined
- 6/3/21
- Messages
- 1
- Points
- 11
There has always been people with strong quantitative backgrounds but lacked domain knowledge of finance.
MFE programs bridged this gap and supplied the talent shortage as Wall Street fully migrated to electronic trading.
It was a niche curriculum for a niche sector. The sector is still niche, but the secret has gotten out, thanks in part to QuantNet.
Since then, places like JaneStreet and Citadel have become household names for STEM students, now that it's made known
the pay is more lucrative then BigTech. MFE programs have also been saturated and growingly competitive. The internet has popularized and closed the information gap on this industry.
EMH (Efficient Market Hypothesis) would suggest that an MFE degree as a pathway to a quant trader / quant dev role is most likely closed. Previously, it may
have sufficed to attend an MFE program, graduate, and be placed in a quant role. Now with degree inflation and increasing abundance of PhDs, as well
widespread layoffs in the tech sector including engineerings and data scientists, MFE graduates must stand out from the rest of their cohort.
I have about 8 years of experience as a software engineer myself, at places such as Amazon, Google, Microsoft. I have and always wanted to be a trader. It's definitely not
for financial reasons, because on a per-hour adjusted basis plus opportunity cost, software engineering pays better. It's just what I'm interested in for my next career step. I understand there's ageism in this industry, and partly why I want to hedge my bet. Doing an MFE would require betting all my chips that I will land a role as a quant. I did my undergrad from a T5 CS undergrad, but have low GPA (I had personal family problems in my final years. Otherwise I was a straight A student) and that would also restrict my options for the MFE program. Even the top 10-20 programs are expensive.
Beyond MFE programs, there are other STEM masters program. The obvious choice would be to do a masters in computer science, but I don't think I'd get much educational value, there. Personally, I think most software engineering and programming is learned outside the classroom and powerpoint slides. I think the best complement to my current skillset would be more math focused. I'm wondering if a masters in Physics, Math or Statistics may actually be better than an MFE for someone with my profile? There's going to be a lot of entrepreneurship and self-started hustling I'd have to do, but it seems like a safer bet in case the quant thing doesn't work out. I'm wondering if this would make me stand out from the sea of MFE grads applying for quant roles? I'm specifically looking at Harvard's Masters in CSE (Computational Science and Engineering) program. It's not a Computer Science program, and borders more on data science. The nice thing about it is I have more flexibility in designing my curriculum, and electing finance classes at Sloan. I suspect the workload is less intense and competitive then at an MFE program, which would mean I would have a higher GPA. As my undergrad grades are low, doing a masters is a way to "reset" my GPA as I know finance firms are keen on academic pedigree and proof. The only problems are that it's not a well ranked school. As far as career placements goes, I'd be able to attend Harvard's career fairs. That seems worth it's weight in gold. The flexibility of the program would afford me more time to spend on extracurriculars including poker and trading, as personal projects and in student organization settings. Finally, even though Harvard's CS program is not well ranked, I'd still have access to world class researchers as well as have pedigree to fundraise in the future (I currently live in Asia, and have realized school brand matters more then domainc specific ranking here).
Regarding the data, there is very few data points that Harvard's Masters in CSE lands people in wall street. They're mostly mid level engineers. I guess my question is, how realistic is it for me to be the exception? The high job placement of people into MFE programs could be a factor of self-selectivity.
MFE programs bridged this gap and supplied the talent shortage as Wall Street fully migrated to electronic trading.
It was a niche curriculum for a niche sector. The sector is still niche, but the secret has gotten out, thanks in part to QuantNet.
Since then, places like JaneStreet and Citadel have become household names for STEM students, now that it's made known
the pay is more lucrative then BigTech. MFE programs have also been saturated and growingly competitive. The internet has popularized and closed the information gap on this industry.
EMH (Efficient Market Hypothesis) would suggest that an MFE degree as a pathway to a quant trader / quant dev role is most likely closed. Previously, it may
have sufficed to attend an MFE program, graduate, and be placed in a quant role. Now with degree inflation and increasing abundance of PhDs, as well
widespread layoffs in the tech sector including engineerings and data scientists, MFE graduates must stand out from the rest of their cohort.
I have about 8 years of experience as a software engineer myself, at places such as Amazon, Google, Microsoft. I have and always wanted to be a trader. It's definitely not
for financial reasons, because on a per-hour adjusted basis plus opportunity cost, software engineering pays better. It's just what I'm interested in for my next career step. I understand there's ageism in this industry, and partly why I want to hedge my bet. Doing an MFE would require betting all my chips that I will land a role as a quant. I did my undergrad from a T5 CS undergrad, but have low GPA (I had personal family problems in my final years. Otherwise I was a straight A student) and that would also restrict my options for the MFE program. Even the top 10-20 programs are expensive.
Beyond MFE programs, there are other STEM masters program. The obvious choice would be to do a masters in computer science, but I don't think I'd get much educational value, there. Personally, I think most software engineering and programming is learned outside the classroom and powerpoint slides. I think the best complement to my current skillset would be more math focused. I'm wondering if a masters in Physics, Math or Statistics may actually be better than an MFE for someone with my profile? There's going to be a lot of entrepreneurship and self-started hustling I'd have to do, but it seems like a safer bet in case the quant thing doesn't work out. I'm wondering if this would make me stand out from the sea of MFE grads applying for quant roles? I'm specifically looking at Harvard's Masters in CSE (Computational Science and Engineering) program. It's not a Computer Science program, and borders more on data science. The nice thing about it is I have more flexibility in designing my curriculum, and electing finance classes at Sloan. I suspect the workload is less intense and competitive then at an MFE program, which would mean I would have a higher GPA. As my undergrad grades are low, doing a masters is a way to "reset" my GPA as I know finance firms are keen on academic pedigree and proof. The only problems are that it's not a well ranked school. As far as career placements goes, I'd be able to attend Harvard's career fairs. That seems worth it's weight in gold. The flexibility of the program would afford me more time to spend on extracurriculars including poker and trading, as personal projects and in student organization settings. Finally, even though Harvard's CS program is not well ranked, I'd still have access to world class researchers as well as have pedigree to fundraise in the future (I currently live in Asia, and have realized school brand matters more then domainc specific ranking here).
Regarding the data, there is very few data points that Harvard's Masters in CSE lands people in wall street. They're mostly mid level engineers. I guess my question is, how realistic is it for me to be the exception? The high job placement of people into MFE programs could be a factor of self-selectivity.
