COMPARE Master Programs Comparison: Which quant program to choose?

[_quanty_]

My goals are to work on the buy side, hopefully in research. I would love to see what the community's thoughts are.

I was also deciding between a few programs, among them were CMU MSCF and UChicago MPCS. I talked to several people (admissions counselors, people working in quant finance and SWE), who said if you want to go into quantitative finance, go CMU. If you want to go into SWE, go UChicago. If you're set on quant finance, CMU is probably the way to go.

 

[science_and_discovery]

I was also deciding between a few programs, among them were CMU MSCF and UChicago MPCS. I talked to several people (admissions counselors, people working in quant finance and SWE), who said if you want to go into quantitative finance, go CMU. If you want to go into SWE, go UChicago. If you're set on quant finance, CMU is probably the way to go.

That's helpful, thank you. I have read that ML experience is valuable / can help you stand out? Do you think the focus on ML can compensate for the lack of career services and difference in perception on the part of employers?

 

[_quanty_]

That's helpful, thank you. I have read that ML experience is valuable / can help you stand out? Do you think the focus on ML can compensate for the lack of career services and difference in perception on the part of employers?

There are a couple things to consider:

1) CMU MSCF requires ML courses in the curriculum and has a career services team dedicated to helping you find the perfect job in quant finance (QF) (I met some of them, they're awesome people who are awesome at their job).

2) GA Tech is significantly cheaper than MSCF in tuition, but what about when you account for future earnings? I don't know the answer. The fact that I can't find a career report for the MSCS makes it tough to determine one. Consider the impact Chat GPT will have on data science and SWE jobs.

3) When applying for QF jobs, you will be competing against people who went to CMU MSCF, MIT MFin, Columbia MFE, along with math PhDs, and many others. I'm not a quant, so I don't know if a comparative advantage in ML will help you edge out against the competition. If the CMU grads have taken 2 ML courses, how much more of an advantage do you have if you've taken 3 or 4?

I do know QF firms are looking for people with the following skills: math, statistics, coding, finance, interpersonal skills, problem solving skills. Will you be able to develop those skills at CMU? Definitely. How about at GA Tech? I'm not familiar with the program, so that's for you to explore a bit.

Go to wherever you think you'll be able to develop those skills to the fullest.

 

[oblio]

I have gotten accepted into both. Which program do you guys think is better? I am currently leaning towards Rutgers being that it is higher on the rankings but I've heard some good things about Stony Brook, and in addition I am a NYS resident so Stony Brook would be cheaper for me.

 

[cyberquant]

Hey guys!

Id like some help and additional details I may not know what will help in deciding between UCLA's MFE Program and NCSU's MFM Program.
NCSU:
[pros]
1. 100% placement rate
2. low program cost
3. near Charlotte- 2nd largest Banking region
4. Statistics focused
5. Growing in rankings
[cons]
1. less famous school

UCLA

[pros]
1. Brand name
2. Asset Management job op is higher
3. 100% placement rate

[cons]
1. Lacking pure math and computing focus
2. heard it feels like an MBA or a MS Finance compared o MFE (please correct me if i'm wrong!)

Please do list your reasons, I've also added a poll to gauge your thoughts! Than you all in advance

 

[Frank Chen]

 

[excaliburrata]

.

 

[jarryds]

SBU as a NY resident is so cheap it hurts. This sub doesn't like to discuss loan payments - I would rather pocket my signing bonus and first paychecks. The program is super math heavy. Really you are getting a degree in applied math (not really a MFE) and will feel that at times. I would say that SBU probably has less mainstream department support than other programs. With that being said, SBU has small class sizes and professors/coordinators will be very helpful and attentive if you want. This program will really be what you put into it. If you are someone who has trouble taking the reigns, this program may not be good for you.

I have yet to have an issue with SBU on my resume - started a FT position with 2 columbia MFEs and 1 from CMU's program.

Didn't realize you also mentioned Rutgers - I was in the same boat 2.5 years ago. I have commented this on someone else's post before - here are the highlights. Rutger's MQF feels super buisnessy. A few of their courses are flat our finance classes. Some of their own alumni have shared with me that they had do to a lot of outside studying to make up for this. If you want to do the "less quanty, may end up getting a CFA and calling it a day" route, this is probably the better pick. Sell side derivatives desks, buy side QR, HFT -> the math rigor at SBU would be a better call. Plus MQF out of state hurts-hurts and the campus is in a not-so-great area.

 

[bahu]

Which one did you end up going to?

 

[dopepanda]

So I have accepted UW CFRM program before, got everything I need, and am waiting for school to start. I was also placed into UCLA MFE's waitlist and got an email asking for my interest in attending this fall. I am wondering what are the pros/cons comparing these two programs?
I have done some research and got an impression that cfrm is more towards risk with more hard skill course set, and ucla mfe is more towards finance/business. If I want to go for trading after I graduate, which program would be better?
If UCLA were to offer me a position, and should I choose to accept it, I will have to go through visa applications all over again lol.

Background information about myself:
International Student;
Bachelor: U of Michigan Computer Science and Data Science double major, math minor;
Work: 1.5 years in Financial Data company as Quant investment software product manager, 0.5 year in Private Equity as Assistant Investment Analyst;

Would love to hear some honest advice, not just related to program selection, but also career development, work-life balance, etc.

 

[ferdyanggara]

hi sorry if my question if unrelated, but it seems that you already in quant industry already, what is the purpose for going back to school

 

[weab]

^ Masters will not help you get into trading and you already went to UMich, a well regarded school and a quantitative discipline. If you want to go into trading you just need to apply and pass interviews.

 

[dopepanda]

hi sorry if my question if unrelated, but it seems that you already in quant industry already, what is the purpose for going back to school

my first job experience is more of a product manager for a software that provides people a platform to back test and simulate their strats so I consider it a more tech related experience? Second one is more vc/pe related and there isn't much on stocks and derivatives, etc.

 

[R_N]

Personally, I would choose Courant over UCLA.

Living in NY is a big plus in my opinion. NY is a great city to explore. I study at Columbia MFE and I go downtown to drink on average twice a week. The smaller class size is nice. It gives it a more cohesive cohort experience. I think apart from socially, the smaller class size doesn't matter. If you want to get to know your professors you still can in a class size of 100+ and I do not know how much 'personal attention' career services will give you. I am also a math nerd and think I would enjoy the classes there.

And not to discredit UCLA, which is a great school, I know graduates from their last class working for as large IBs, S&P, Blackrock, and Jane Street. One of my best friends just graduated UCLA MFE! You hit it on the mark that since UCLA is tied with Anderson their students get a lot more resources put towards them despite their class size. We have only one dedicated career service member for FE as a comparison. UCLA also has great sports teams to go watch while you are there.

Chintan is correct to say that it's hard to objectively say which is better. Both programs Can create strong quants/traders it really depends on what environment you want to be in and what you do during it. I know a FE degree is a professional choice but try not to think myopically. An FE degree is way more than what you learn in the classroom. It will be the peers you meet, the professors you look up to, the city you get to explore, the place you like to study, and the pride that comes with being a Bruin or a Bobcat.

Good Luck!

Why you guys all talk about Courant. NYU MFE is not in Courant. NYU MFE is in the Tandon school of engineering

 

[Lukee]

Why you guys all talk about Courant. NYU MFE is not in Courant. NYU MFE is in the Tandon school of engineering

NYU has 2 programs. The masters in mathematical finance is in Courant and the masters in financial engineering is in Tandon.

 

[R_N]

NYU has 2 programs. The masters in mathematical finance is in Courant and the masters in financial engineering is in Tandon.

Yes. I know that NYU has a really good FinMath program in Courant. I just feel weird cuz that person asks to compare between NYU MSFE with UCLA MFE and some people here are talking about Courant. I think maybe they didn't distringution the difference between NYU MFE program and NYU Courant FinMath program

 

[R_N]

I would definitely choose Courant over UCLA. Nevertheless, comparing UCLA MFE and NYU MSFE, I would choose UCLA MFE program other than NYU MFE. Here are some reasons:

1. Location and Competition: NYU's MFE program, while based in NYC, faces stiff competition from other prestigious programs in the city like NYU Courant, Cornell (with its final term in NYC), CMU NYC, Columbia MFE, and Baruch MFE. Among these, NYU's MFE seems less advantageous.
2. Network and Environment: UCLA's MFE is housed within the Anderson School of Management, offering extensive networking opportunities and a collaborative environment, which I find crucial for professional growth.
3. Curriculum Interest: The curriculum at UCLA MFE appeals to me more, based on what I've read on their website.
4. Program Duration and Cost: UCLA MFE is a 15-month program, shorter than NYU's two-year MFE program. Considering the high cost of living in NYC, UCLA seems more financially feasible without compromising on the benefits, despite NYU's physical proximity to NYC.

So overall, again, I would choose UCLA MFE.

 

[shuvamsingh]

I am a 12 passed out, getting all colleges cs but not iit i just wanted to know which nit or iiit i should choose to get into cmu mscf or princeton mfe I will also be doing cfa and frm
Please if in your leisure time you could mention what you did right to get into cmu please
** Also which college did you pass out from **

 

[ShadawFighter]

Hi Pranay,
I am in similar situation right now.
I am IIT Madras Chem-23 passed out,
Currently working as Software Developer at Algorithmic Execution firm ( closely working with the quantitative researchers in the company)
I have cleared CFA L1, will complete L2 by may 2025.
I am deciding if to apply for MFE programs or Prepare for CAT and get into IIMs. I am considering IIM's to get into FO roles (Management consulting/PE/IB) and MFE to get into mostly Quantitative Researcher Role.
What career trajectory did you finally take, and what would you suggest to someone like me who is in similar place as you were back in 2018.

 

[thcreech]

Hey everyone, I was just seeing what the general consensus between these two programs are. I see that the QCF has a slightly higher salary and the FinMath has slightly better placement. Big kicker for me is I would be in-state at NCSU and therefore it is significantly cheaper. Ideally I would want to work sell-side after the program (not much for NYC or Chicago so likely Atlanta or Charlotte). The career services at NCSU also really stand out to me but I’m not sure if the prestige of the Georgia Tech name would make it more worthwhile.