No College but lots of Book Reading?

[Brian Scherms]

I dont have a university degree but like to study material on my own. I am currently working as a programmer and learned everything I know outside of college.

I've been looking at various lists of the maths required to work as a quant - stochastic calc, martingales, all the calcs and just all those other maths that people list as good things to know as a quant.

Is it possible, after studying (not just reading), but really taking it all in, to become a quant at any level of a company? I'm not thinking of working at anything big in NYC or any of those big firms making 500k.

I was thinking that if, on my own, I could make a model of some sort and prove that I can make money with some algorithm that it would stand out or at least equally to having a degree with no proof of experience.

I'm all about being creative and forging my own path and any advice or light shed on this would be awesome. This is my first post in here, so hi everybody and thanks!

 

[bigbadwolf]

Is it possible, after studying (not just reading), but really taking it all in, to become a quant at any level of a company? I'm not thinking of working at anything big in NYC or any of those big firms making 500k.

Assuming you're serious, what's your math background right now? All the serious posters on this forum are autodidacts to varying extents -- they've learnt to read and study by themselves. But a formal structured academic program -- if done right -- does things one can't do by oneself.

I was thinking that if, on my own, I could make a model of some sort and prove that I can make money with some algorithm that it would stand out or at least equally to having a degree with no proof of experience.

There's no such proof.

 

[Brian Scherms]

The last semester I had gone to college I took Calculus One and got an A-. This includes not having gone to class except for the first day and the day of the final because I was working during the class period time and there wasn't another time I could go. Having done all the "teaching" to myself for what some students may believe you need a teacher, is what got me thinking I could study the higher classes on my own.

I understand that a structured program would be better, but for my family's situation right now I have to work while my wife is in school.

And thanks for the correct, bigbadwolf, about the proof. I guess what I really meant to say was that I could somehow demonstrate the ability to do similar results as one with a "degree".

I know the HR departments has to filter out the less desired applicants somehow, but I believe that those potentially over you care most about the results you could produce.

Any ideas for my situation, bigbadwolf, or any body else?

 

[bigbadwolf]

The hurdle is getting past HR -- their computers, their algorithms, and the dullards who work there. Also, even if you get past them and are hired, the next place you apply to will still look at your application askance -- it will be unconventional. People doing the hiring like to play it safe (aka "CYA").

The learning probably can be done by yourself, and probably better than some of the bum programs out there.

 

[IntoDarkness]

u can do it urself but as u only have calc1 it prob gona take u a while to get there

 

[Daniel Duffy]

You could do a degree in maths with the Open University which seems to have a good reputation.

You can learn calculus on your own but not the deeper concepts I reckon. Then the prof has to appear on the scene.

 

[Fer Carranza]

I know OP was probably referring to working at banks mostly but there's this Op-Ed from the NYTimes about working for Google that's interesting.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/23/opinion/sunday/friedman-how-to-get-a-job-at-google.html?_r=0

Maybe you can become a programmer at a bank first and then move within the firm once you've learned on your own and you've shown what you can do. @GoIllini should have a good answer for you.

 

[Dataminer]

Have you thought about online degrees like OMS in CS from Gtech? it's only like 6~7k. I think you can set your own pace for the most part.

https://www.udacity.com/georgia-tech

 

[bigbadwolf]

You could do a degree in maths with the Open University which seems to have a good reputation.

Not enough by way of course offerings. In decades past they've had courses on Galois theory and differential geometry.

You can learn calculus on your own but not the deeper concepts I reckon. Then the prof has to appear on the scene.

You can learn it in an incomplete fashion -- but to do it properly you need the prof to test you and to point out the flaws and holes in your reasoning (as shown in your homework assignments and tests). Math is a social activity and what passes muster as a proof depends on an evolving consensus based on a growing body of thought, experience, and counter-examples.

 

[GoIllini]

Banks often feel more comfortable hiring someone with a college degree, but you might be able to get away without one.

If you have some reputable firms on your resume and you can pass a technical interview, you may be in the running.

 

[Daniel Duffy]

I take it back ...

Early Warning Signal: courses with the word 'thinking' in the title.

 

[Brian Scherms]

The general curriculum that I'm following at the moment are the same college books that my school is using for the courses they provide. Also, I am doing additional material that people support as good to use as well - such as the list of books in this forum. I have been assigning myself all the odd problems in the book and treating it like real HW in a class. When I get to the chapter reviews and tests I treat them like real tests, making sure I review thoroughly for it and that I get at least a 95% on it.
I don't see how in terms of ACTUAL comprehension that this is any different than sitting in class and hearing the professor regurgitate what the intro of that chapter would have said anyway.

I guess the "professors" I'm counting on are the authors of the book.

As to any of the deeper theories @bigbadwolf , I'm anxious to learn whatever those are and to not skip over anything! I'm sure if it's complicated enough of a theory there are books on those subjects as well.

I've noticed that I really feel much more engaged in the material in the way I'm doing it now than when I was doing it to get a good grade. I don't think everybody is that way but it's how I am.

 

[bigbadwolf]

I don't see how in terms of ACTUAL comprehension that this is any different than sitting in class and hearing the professor regurgitate what the intro of that chapter would have said anyway.

It isn't. Overpriced US "education" is one big con. You can cover calc 1,2,3, ODE, linear algebra, basic probability by yourself without any disadvantage. Where you will start stumbling is the upper-division theory-heavy courses like real analysis. At its best, formal education means a gifted instructor imparting insight that would otherwise take months or years to acquire (if ever). It means getting problem sets from that instructor that stretch one to the limit -- and which he then proceeds to dissect and to point out the lacuna and flaws. But this occurs only infrequently in US "education." *Real* math is a social activity -- other than good teachers you need other students to talk to, to explain proofs and ideas to in your own words (and conversely, to learn from).

As to any of the deeper theories @bigbadwolf , I'm anxious to learn whatever those are and to not skip over anything! I'm sure if it's complicated enough of a theory there are books on those subjects as well.

Duffy's words, not mine. But I guess what he meant was understanding the motivation behind, and need for, notions like completeness, uniform convergence, and the like. There are books -- though you will have to consult several books in each area and it will take you a while to become au fait with the literature. But other than this there's also the issue of technical competence -- being able to perform under pressure and time constraints. This technical competence tends to occur in a formal setting. Again, I'm thinking of the best programs -- not the ones at Swampwater U.

I've noticed that I really feel much more engaged in the material in the way I'm doing it now than when I was doing it to get a good grade. I don't think everybody is that way but it's how I am.

That is usually the case.

 

[Brian Scherms]

thanks for the insight bigbadwolf. I've never had a teacher ever that I felt imparted information outside of the book's capability but that would be great if I had one. I'm not sure what I would do about the social aspect of learning Math, but as to the being under pressure and time constraints I suppose when I take my tests I can put a time limit on it and if I don't get the right grade or do it in time I'll punish myself by running a couple miles or something.

Are those upper level math classes useful for effective quant level work? Not that I would skip them but if I felt more confident about learning that material to the fullest level of which you're describing in the social aspect, I'd probably put more work into being creative in finding a way to achieve that outside of the classroom. Maybe looking in math forums or other advanced books? Not sure yet.

 

[bigbadwolf]

Are those upper level math classes useful for effective quant level work?

They're indispensable for learning how to think and talk like a mathematician. "Quant," on the other hand, is a "floating signifier" -- it doesn't have a time-invariant definition. The financial world is continuing to change -- and therefore so too are the job categories.

 

[ygmwy]

If you hate school, you're gonna hate banks and bosses and the pressure. Also, even if you manage to get in somewhere, you're going to realize that most of the learning is not done on your own, but through other people. Being a quant is not about doing the math on your own. That was a long time ago. If you don't do well with teachers, or people, and can't explain what you're doing, or work well in a team, you'll never succeed in Quant. That is, assuming you get in. You'll also face judgement of your peers. You don't like learning because you don't like pressure? It is a completely different story when you are managing someone else's money. It's not the same as your programming job.

If you're a genius, I suggest you stay at home and make money in bed. It will probably work better for someone like you. However, I caution, there's more to learn that you can't learn from books that are necessary to be a quant. Try becoming a professional trader by reading books and studying on your own. These kinds of industry exposures and networking opportunities are what will separate a degree student from you.

Also, I think you seriously overestimate your ability to learn graduate level math on your own. Getting an A- without studying in calc 1 is nothing to brag about. Especially on this forum. Many people here have placed out of calc 1. And Grad level math is lacking in good documentation and free online resources. Books and papers are convoluted as each mathematician tries to outdo the other in terms of the number of confusing symbols used in their publications.

Programming is very different, and most of what you see about the quant field on the internet is outdated or a myth. There is good documentation for programming languages so you can always find what you need. Not so with quant. Don't apply the same rules. Go to school. If you need cheap, go to Stony Brook University. They accept everyone, and give a decent intro education. Also, good schools have good job placement mechanisms that you will be missing. Even for the small companies. Quant graduates are so many now that the market is flooded. Don't assume you will even be given a chance to interview.

 

[Brian Scherms]

@ygmwy Thanks for the response bud. It's not that I don't like school because of the pressure or because of the teachers or people. Before programming I was in sales and was great with people.

I wasn't bragging with the A- as I'm sure everybody is smarter than me on here - I was simply giving some sort of a base line for people giving me advice to work with. I don't really like school because I don't see the point of going if I can study the same material on my own.

The grad material is another reason why I was asking for advice - because I don't know the answer since I can only go off what I've experienced thus far. It could very well be that I would be in over my head.

I like your idea about trading on my own. If I could never get a chance to interview then self-employment would be the only option.

 

[ygmwy]

@ygmwy Thanks for the response bud. It's not that I don't like school because of the pressure or because of the teachers or people. Before programming I was in sales and was great with people.

I wasn't bragging with the A- as I'm sure everybody is smarter than me on here - I was simply giving some sort of a base line for people giving me advice to work with. I don't really like school because I don't see the point of going if I can study the same material on my own.

The grad material is another reason why I was asking for advice - because I don't know the answer since I can only go off what I've experienced thus far. It could very well be that I would be in over my head.

I like your idea about trading on my own. If I could never get a chance to interview then self-employment would be the only option.

This is my honest opinion:

If you are serious about quant, then you should reconsider school. Even if you can learn a lot on your own--and I'm sure you can--you miss out on a lot of things: working in teams, networking opportunities, name branded resume, employer recognition, insightful professors, industry secrets, the experience, automatic friends in the field, school resources, tests & homework, ability to work with live trading terminals and software, inclusion in the "in" club, and insightful professors academics, and so much more. You will always be outclassed by someone who has gone through a good program.

You are also missing the point of quant. Quants don't just do math. Most of what quants do has nothing to do with what they learned in school. You can't just study textbooks. How are you going to learn big data, or how to use Bloomberg, or how to build a trading strategy, or how to properly hedge a portfolio on your own? (They ask these questions on interviews by the way). You learn them by meeting people, working in the field, and indirectly through your coursework. If you think Banks use Black-Scholes or Martingales in real life, then you're wrong (everyone knows that most of textbook financial math theory is wrong and for example only). And if you think that quants solve stochastic differential equations all day, you're wrong about that too (only a few genius researcher quants from elite universities can do that). What you would be learning by studying on your own doesn't even apply in the real world. And you can't really apply it yourself.

Trade on your own. It doesn't require too much knowledge, it allows you to not go to school, and you don't have to worry too much about math. But if you think you're going to pick up Shreve, or read a book and then learn how to make a successful trading strategy, then that is seriously doubtful. Stat arb is on the decline, and only the biggest players can make good money doing that. But seriously, why are you so stubborn about school? If you're really serious about quant, then you should reevaluate your position that school is useless. I think everyone here is being polite. You should be forewarned that if you really hate school that much, it's going to be a very uphill battle.

 

[Brian Scherms]

Thanks for your opinion. I'm stubborn about school ( the school I was going to is Utah Valley University). It's not a big school by any means and pretty much anybody can get in (I don't have a bad GPA though). The teachers in the undergrad program just seem useless to me. I learned more on Khan Academy about Biology than I did by the teacher who was supposed to be the hardest (and best) and I ended up getting 98%'s and up on the tests (also not bragging it was just College Bio).

At this school anyway, I feel like the teachers are useless and are wasting my time by giving me a mandatory attendance policy. As far as the connections there I don't really get the vibe that anybody there would be useful to connect with although I could be wrong. I've never been shy with people or had a problem working with teams. I don't think the school is big enough to actual be "name brand" opportunity.I don't mind homework (I've made myself a schedule with deadlines and do problems and do the tests or projects in the books). I guess my beef with college is I've never had an insightful teacher that made me think "wow I'm sure glad I'm in this person's class". In fact it's been quite the opposite wishing I could just spend the class time reading the book on my own.

Maybe because the competition is so fierce for quant jobs that a degree is just the first check mark you have to fulfill to even be looked at? My new "no school", "yes education" belief has mostly been towards the idea of being a programmer which is known to not require a formal education but it sounds like it doesn't transfer over very nicely to the quant field.

 

[ygmwy]

No it does not transfer over nicely. The best quants are experts in math, computers, and the financial markets (don't underestimate that knowledge, that intuition takes time to build). But anyway, your problem is that you've never visited a top notch university before. Maybe you've outgrown Utah Valley University, but you have yet to realize what a monumental task you've set for yourself. I also came from a no-name university, but even though most professors didn't impress me, I didn't say "f*** school" and leave. I took graduate classes, and finance classes, and started teaching, and doing research at a grad level. Then I got into a top quant program and realized what dumb sh** I was. When you are finally around very insightful students and professors in the field, you feel happy to be where you belong, but also a lot of pressure to catch up. Now if you left school because you didn't want to listen to the teacher, then that's a different story, but if you wanted to be more challenged, you should have gone higher in education, and you should have set your sights on a better university. You should go to one of the top quant programs and sit in on one of their classes. I guarantee you will change your mind about everything. Forgive my bluntness.