Congrats Jaggy- I'm sure you're happy it's finally doneI defend my dissertation next week after an 11 year struggle (I quit for 3 years). I work in education and it cannot do me any harm but I wouldnt recommend it unless you are sure it is what you want to do, much more difficut than a masters.
True. There's plenty of sales/trading guys where I work with that make 7 figures with a 4-year.I've considered it.
I have a buddy on Wall St that makes serious dough without any advanced degrees.
Depends. If you like to learn new things, want to contribute something genuinely novel to the chosen field, and want to devote a significant chunk of your life to understanding and thinking rationally and critically, or want to increase your "hireability" in some professions, then "Yes".is it a worthwhile pursuit?
My friend turned that down and he's kicking himself. He is doing his first postdoc making $400 USD per month in India. He could have been working at a bank in Zürich.Is it a PhD in Math, Physics, Comp Sci Engineering.
Come to wall street work as a quant and make serious bank.
Pursuit for what?is it a worthwhile pursuit?
i thought ibanks prefer fast flexible unblemished brains. a bachelor eco from an ivy would be ideal.True. There's plenty of sales/trading guys where I work with that make 7 figures with a 4-year.
But, to make serious money as a quant or even get a job as a quant you'll need a PhD in something with complex math and programming from an ivy. In iBanking you'll need at least a MBA to get to the associate level.
But that's a little off topic. I just wanted to give the OP some examples of where you can actually make a lot of money with a PhD. Assuming of course that money makes things worthwhile which is debatable.
Generalizing on most of the bulge bracket analyst programs this is true. The models in banking are frankly not that complicated. I've seen all majors get into the analyst programs anybody with intelligence can easily learn it. They look for intelligent/hard working people so they can mold their "unblemished brains" into their typical banker. But, when I said MBA this is also true. Typically bulge brackets hire bachelors for analyst programs and after that typically hire top10 MBA's for their associate programs.i thought ibanks prefer fast flexible unblemished brains. a bachelor eco from an ivy would be ideal.
PhDs minds tend to be narrowly focused, slow and inflexible.
quants builds the models?Generalizing on most of the bulge bracket analyst programs this is true. The models in banking are frankly not that complicated. I've seen all majors get into the analyst programs anybody with intelligence can easily learn it. They look for intelligent/hard working people so they can mold their "unblemished brains" into their typical banker. But, when I said MBA this is also true. Typically bulge brackets hire bachelors for analyst programs and after that typically hire top10 MBA's for their associate programs.
I would say ibanks look for people who they can mold to be brilliant and places like google/facebook hire people who are already brilliant.
On the other hand quants are a completely different animal. I used to think I was good at math until I met a couple quants. They do very complex math and programming and are very specialized. Things that an ivy league grad from any bachelors program just won't be able to do. It's very difficult to get a position as a quant at a hedgefund/ibank without a PhD from an elite school.
For the record. I'm not a quant nor do I have an advanced degree. I'm a 2nd year analyst at a bulge bracket. These are just my observations having worked in this business for 2 years.
Quant is a fairly general term. Depends on what group/desk you are in.quants builds the models?
analyst feeds in inputs?
sorry for my ignorance
which jobs are you referring to?Quant is a fairly general term. Depends on what group/desk you are in.
For example a quant developer may be asked to work on high frequency trading algorithms or asked to design models to price derivatives, predict market movements. Lots of C++, statistical analysis. Most likely they will get a base salary and percentage of profits from trades made using their models. Very lucrative and it's not like you are creating a new model all that often. They'll be paid best working at hedge funds.
An analyst is an even more general term. It really depends on what desk/group you are in. Speaking for myself I work G10 FX strategies which is mostly fundamental analysis not math heavy at all. Basically I support the FX traders. There are analyst who work back office and basically do financial reporting(super boring) just using excel to compile a days data together in a neat way.
In IBD(investment banking division) the valuation models are HS math, build pitchbooks and sell. I mean speaking for myself and the other analyst at different banks I know, we are just excel monkeys.
I wouldn't be sorry for asking these questions. It's not like they are general knowledge and banks love someone who thirst to learn something new and gain knowledge.
But lets not get it twisted these jobs are very difficult to obtain. A PhD from an Ivy/MIT/Stanford will only get them to glance at your resume.
That being said. Like I previously stated I'm a second year analyst out of school so I'm surely not an authority on any of this and I'll probably be out of this business very soon.
In many fields--the sciences particularly--it's a necessity for a good job. A Master's degree and $3.50 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks, but not a research position or even a teaching post. There are thousands of people with MAs, MSs, and even PhDs who can't get any sort of work in the field of the major because the jobs just aren't there. A PhD isn't a guarantee, but it's a lot closer than a Master's is.
working on one idea for a lifetime."PhDs minds tend to be narrowly focused, slow and inflexible" the OP writes. Making sweeping generalizations is seldom useful, but this one is downright embarassing.
This reminds me of the joke that says that undergrads know very little about a lot of things, but PhDs know a lot about very few things.working on one idea for a lifetime.
you have to be a flip-flopper if you want success in an ibank. jmho.
if 51% of the population has a trait, would that still be a sweeping generalization?
every decision is based on some degree of generalization.
el diablo's statement is more sweeping than my original statement. jmhoThis reminds me of the joke that says that undergrads know very little about a lot of things, but PhDs know a lot about very few things.
Let's clarify "one idea" and "lifetime". The Distinguished Faculty that I know in my Department, which is not Finance but rather Social Sciences, had a mid-career "idea-switch"- or some iteration of it. You have to keep your mind and your ideas fresh- can't do that if you're stuck on just one thing.
Yes- it would still be a sweeping generalization because we, the public, would need more information on the population you're referring to. For example, that statement might work for the nuclear physicists (sorry my brothers) but not the sociologists I know.
Don't know how to answer that. I'm not a quant nor do I aspire to be one so my knowledge on what exactly a quant does in each specific area is limited. The quantnet.com guys can answer your questions in more depth I'm sure.which group has the most clout?
No you didn't. You also enjoyed it. Don't be so modest.It's pretty much a requirement for pure science majors, unless they want to pursue a career in medicine. As an engineer, I'll tell you that it limits your options to academia and the research industry when you're done. I got it purely because it is a requirement to be in academia.
"Renegade physicists" are loved as quants in iBanking. If I need to, that is what I will do. I hope I don't need to go that route but we will see what research positions, viz. postdocs are available when I finish.
i feel flip floppers generally do better in the markets. the biggest mistake for anyone is to fall in love with a position. jmho.Don't know how to answer that. I'm not a quant nor do I aspire to be one so my knowledge on what exactly a quant does in each specific area is limited. The quantnet.com guys can answer your questions in more depth I'm sure.
As for ibanks liking flipfloppers. If you mean they like people who have a wide range of knowledge I would agree but, they are still going to expect you to have significant technical knowledge for the interviews. Many of the 2 year analyst programs are rotational. It gives you a chance to a. gain knowledge in different divisions of the bank and b. most analyst don't really know what exactly they want to get into yet.
Are you currently in school now? If so where if you don't mind me asking? You seem fairly interested in working on the street.
Not sure where most CEO's come from but in terms of the most difficult rotations to get and what is held in the highest regard/"sexiest" for lack of a better term rotation IMO M&A is king.what i meant was ...........within the ibank, which group has the most power? from which group is the CEO most likely to come from?
for example, at a paper company like dunder mifflin, sales is king
Not sure where most CEO's come from but in terms of the most difficult rotations to get and what is held in the highest regard/"sexiest" for lack of a better term rotation IMO M&A is king.
If you have completed any levels of the CFA that's a big plus it's got a reputation and should definitely get some looks from banks.
I haven't looked at the material but my roomate passed level I after 2 months of studying which is pretty damn good, he said the material was tough. I only have my series 7 which took me a week and series 63 took me 2 days but it's no comparison to the CFA.
As for your exp. I downplay our jobs but there's way more to it than filling in forms even for the backoffice guys! haha