How are they treated? Author: z Date: Jun 2, 2001 2:30 AM EST How are their working hours? Pay? Thanks!!! ---------------- Great Author: Skiffster Date: Jun 2, 2001 2:44 AM EST I work as a front office Quant in S&T. Working hours are longer than the traders, but you really set your own hours to some extent. My normal day is around 12 hours. The pay is incredible compared to what you can earn elsewhere, particularly now that the dot-com bubble has burst. Make sure you get a bonus-dominated compensation package. In terms of respect - you have to earn it like everyone else. Help the book, and you will get it. I LOVE this job - it's like doing science on speed. If you enjoy pressure, this in the only industry to be in. -------------------- Describe Job? Author: m2005 Date: Jun 2, 2001 5:32 PM EST Could you describe what exactly a quant analyst does, for those who don't know? It sounds interesting, as you described it... --------------------- Job Description Author: Skiffster Date: Jun 4, 2001 2:23 AM EST OK, a Quant Analyst is a PhD from a a quantitative field (math or physics usually) who applies their knowledge and skills in the market. I can only comment on the role of a front office Quant, because this is what I do. We support both the Traders and Structured Products groups. We build models, find relationships and quantify assumptions. I love the fact that my job is different every day. I always walk in and have a new set of challenges awaiting me, all of which stretch my skills to the limit. It is hard work, stressful and very rewarding. Hope that helps. Dave P. -------------------- PhD? Author: anderla Date: Jun 4, 2001 5:38 AM EST I understand some firms like DE Shaw take people without PhDs as quants. What firms are you talking about, IBanks? I'm interested in becoming a quant, and I have a (pure) math PhD place starting this summer; But I don't want to spend five years doing research on something unrelated to finance just to get a PhD. Any suggestions on how to proceed? Along the same lines, how are people with a Masters in math in finance from NYU generally viewed (with respect to quant jobs)? ---------------------- Your decision Author: Skiffster Date: Jun 4, 2001 1:49 PM EST Look, there is nothing wrong with being eager, but I think you missed the point. The skills you learn *during* your education are what you use as a Quant. If you want to start working, and are interested in the quantitative side of the business, then sign on as an analyst (and I don't mean an IB analyst). It may seem pointless to you now, but the bar was set this high years ago. Why would any decent firm take someone on who hasn't done his/her PhD when every person who already works there has "done the hard yards"? If you can comprehensively show that you have something to offer that a PhD does not, then you have got a shot. You will be competing against thousands of PhD grads from around the world though. This job can pay upwards of $500k/year - compare that to $50k/year as a Professor in an English University!! Masters people are a dime-a-dozen. The extra time in the PhD program is worth the effort. One important piece of advice - if you are having questions about wanting to do a PhD now, you will have a lot more questions 12-24 months in. I would look very carefully at your alternatives. In all honesty though, you will not get a job as a Quant without some form of higher education. Good luck. ------------------- Compensation Author: m2005 Date: Jun 4, 2001 2:04 PM EST What is compensation to start? How quickly does it rise, and what's it based on? Also, what're exit opportunities like after a few years? Are there any books that describe a quant analyst's lifestyle and work, ie monkey business for ib and liar's poker for bond trading? Your input is very appreciated. ---------------------- Financial Engineering Degree Author: Risc69 Date: Jun 5, 2001 11:45 PM EST I understand that a Phd in a quant field does teach a lot of technical skills. I still have to wonder if a one year Financial Engineering degree is more appropriate b/c it's more targeted (i.e. directly deals with quantitative finance, options theory etc..)? I mean why spend years studying physics or math when you can knock out a one-year program at any decent school and get into the business? I'm considering a Phd in economics along with an FE degree but now I'm thinking an FE degree is enough. Now I'm not saying a PhD in physics or math isn't worth the effort, I'm just playing devil's advocate and trying to get more info. Also, I'd appreciate any info on how your bank or others view a Financial Engineering degree. Thank you for your previous post. I hope to hear your reply. ~Risc ------------------- FE vs PhD Author: Skiffster Date: Jun 6, 2001 4:15 AM EST OK, this is a tough subject. a) I agree, a FE degree could teach you most of the technical skills you need to do the job. b) What an FE degree does not do is teach someone to do reseach. Not even close. c) We have seen FE graduates at interviews, and they have never impressed. d) Interviewer bias - you ARE competing against a lot of PhD graduates. A couple of very strong internships are going to be needed for the FE person. All that said, a PhD is no guarantee of getting in to this field either. Good luck. ------------------- More about the FE Author: Risc69 Date: Jun 7, 2001 3:20 PM EST First of all, thank you for responding so quickly. The sales/trading board is dead and it is so hard to get any reliable info on this field. Hell, the FE degree is only 6 or 7 years old. What you said makes some sense. You said in your reply that the FE is not enough for a "quant" but will it "impress" for a trading position? Also, what is your opinion on how much value an FE adds to a trader's skillset? And if you don't mind my asking, what turned you off about the FE grads you interviewed? Where did they graduate from? I know these are a lot of questions but if you're in the field, I think any reliable info will greatly help all the students on these boards. Thank you again. Hope to hear from you soon. ------------------ agreed with Skiffster Author: newguy-london Date: Jun 4, 2001 9:29 PM EST Here's my personal story, which may help you. I got a science degree and a PhD from one of the top universities. Actually, I choose to go into IB, which means that my diploma is not valued as much: only starting as a second-year analyst in a BB bank in July. I had some offers from other banks, though, as a quant (CSFB and MS). They were taking me as an associate (my PhD is on math applied to physics), but I choose not to take it. I agree with Skiffster in that they do tend to be more keen on PhD's for quant position. I do know some people however who got in there after only a good 1-year master in a related field. But that's in England, where we specialise earlier, and are usually stronger in a particular field after four or five years at university than in the US (in general). In either case, I'd say it always helps if you're from a top university (Ivy league for US, Oxbridge for England). My opinion is that you should NOT do a PhD if it's only to be able to have a quant job later. Honestly, a PhD takes ages, and is usually quite tough to get: you're basically doing something that noone else has done before, so you can't really look up for the answer anywhere. Looking back on it, I don't regret (it was a challenge), but really, I would not advise you to do it unless you like your subject (as I used to) and are really motivated to do research. It's just that the motivation may otherwise fade away after 3-4 years of research. In my case, it actually made me realise that I don't want to do anything like scientific research anymore. Which is why I'm going into IB, so I can play on my other skills & passion for certain industries. Good luck with your decision. --------------------- PhDs Author: anderla Date: Jun 5, 2001 8:21 AM EST Great replies! Was there an understanding that you would be promoted straight to associate without having to go back to school for an MBA? I'm currently at a top UK university, and I have a place at Columbia to do a PhD. Do you know where most quants got their PhDs from? I'm a little worried because Columbia is not in the top 5 for pure math. A final question: Do you know anything about (EDF) Man Investment Products? How are they generally regarded? ---------------------- some answers Author: newguy-london Date: Jun 6, 2001 12:41 PM EST As far as I know, I won't have to go for an MBA to get promoted to associate in IB. A good example is a science PhD guy from my university who got promoted very fast in my bank, and is now an MD (though he's apparently incredibly good at his job in terms of flair). Having said that, most ppl who haven't got an MBA or a PhD can usually get promoted anyway in London. In the US, things are a little different, and ppl tend to go for an MBA in order to get promoted from analyst to associate. The point in London is that they do't really value your PhD that much for IB. Sure, it means you're more likely to get yourself a job, but you still start as analyst and have to prove yourself. The point is that what you've learnt during your PhD doesn't have that much to do with IB. There is however a correlation between a PhD and a faster promotion, but I think this is because the PhDs may in general be smarter on some issues from the start. It's not much to do with the diploma itself. If you're looking for a quant or trader type of job, then things are different. The skills you learnt are much more relevant, and this is why they can make you start as an associate (provided you are strong in the other skills required in IB, and that you can show it). I got offers at associate levels in the very top banks as quant and as trader (though refused them, as I don't want to do quant jobs in the long-term, and find trading quite stressful and non-transferrable). As to your question concerning Columbia, I'd say you should be fine if you took the PhD place. The point is that a PhD is a PhD, as long as the university is well known (and Columbia is okay). They usually don't give a damn if it's strong or less strong in a field, the point being that they probably won't know the details of your research. They will just look at the fact that you got a PhD in a very numerate field. Of course, if you can get into Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford or MIT, your chances increase even more (incl. for London, where they know these places, esp. the first two). Where are you studying in the UK? Do you plan to come back to London after the PhD? ---------------------- Hard decision? Author: Skiffster Date: Jun 6, 2001 1:10 PM EST Hi newguy-london. Thanks for the comments. Can I ask, what exactly was your motivation for wanting to go into IB? How did you find the interview process? I went to a few analyst/associate interviews in the UK. Got nowhere in the associate level positions, but made it quite far through the analyst rounds, before finally pulling out when I got the job offer I was waiting for. By the way, any colleagues from the academic world who you think might fit in well as a front-office Quant? We are always recruiting. Look forward to your reply. ------------------------ reply Author: newguy-london Date: Jun 6, 2001 4:52 PM EST Hi Dave. You're right, I quickly realised there was no real chance to get straight in as an associate with 'only' a PhD, but no job experience. Still, I'm going for IB, rather than for a quant position, for the following reasons, some of which are just peculiar to me: 1. I'm a little fed up of quant. analysis (no disrespect, it's just I've had enough of it for some time). I wanted a change. Of course, as an analyst in IB you still do modelling, but it's pretty easy wrt to what we did during the PhD, and the modelling stops soon after a promotion to associate. This means that after 2-3 years, you don't spend as much time in front of the computer, which is something I prefer. 2. In IB, there is a lot of client interaction (esp. from associate onwards). This suits my interpersonal skills more. I'm no extravert type, but I like the idea of going to business dinners, meeting ceo's..etc (even if it's just to take notes at meetings as an analyst). The hours are horrid at the beginning, but they get much better as VP and MD (unless you really want to work harder than you need) if you make it there. There's a lot of travelling going on too, if you decide to focus on a region (eg France, Italy or perhaps Eastern Europe). This all suits me more. 3. By choosing IB, I keep my options open. As a trader or quant, skills are not really that transferrable. As a quant, I guess you can still go for some hedge fund..etc, but it's still the same type of work: you'll do modelling in front of a computer. With IB, you can swap more easily to the buy-side (VC or PE), or (as I may feel like doing) to a large corporation with a higher-up position: eg a telecom/technology company if you do telecoms/technology, a utility company if you utility..etc. You salary would then decrease, but you get in as manager, and the hours are great (9-5). A friend of mine did some IB in a tech group for a few years. He now works for Hewlet-Packard in a high-up position. His hours are 9-5.30, and he really gets to enjoy life. Remember we're all gonna die at some point anyway (sorry to sound pessimistic). 4. In terms of salary, you mentioned that a quant can get up to 500k per year. This surprises me. I think quant can be paid really well, but I'm not sure it can increase as much, even after ten years, unless you swap to another job (not sure which one?). But I'm sure you know the salaries better than I do for quants. : ) As far as IB is concerned, the pay of an analyst is about the same as a new quant. Though, if you get in as a trader with an associate position, you get more than as an analyst, obviously. The good thing however with IB i that salaries increase very rapidly. If you make it to VP, your salary will then certainly be 500K+ in a BB bank. 5. Last, but not least, I choose IB over quant because of the increasing direct responsability you get in deals. The problem with quant is that one is always gonna be a support for others. An extremely valuable support, true, but still a support. I want to feel that, someyears after I work my ass off, I can be the boss. These are my motivations (some of which are a little superficial). I certainly know some ppl who would be interested in being a quant. Their opinion is quite different from mine, and probably more similar to yours. Ok, I gotta rush now. Hope the mail was not too boring. See you. ------------------------ Great feedback Author: Skiffster Date: Jun 7, 2001 7:56 AM EST Hi newguy Thanks for the reply. It certainly echoes some thoughts that I had initially, but after some time in the job I don't see my future anywhere other than on a trading desk. A couple of comments * travel - believe me, after a few years you will not view this as a perk. * totally agree that skills learnt in IB are far more transferrable. By the same token though, there is no way into trading other than a path similar to that I have taken. * Salary : $500k is not difficult if you are working in the right group. $250k is a pretty normal package for someone with a few years experience. * Who's the boss? Once again, this is strongly related to the group you are in. I work in a very quantitative field, our group is run by a quant, has more quants than any other part of the business, and has a great reputation. As you can probably tell, I love my job :-) Enjoy your new career. I'm sure you will be very successful. ------------------------ Hi! Author: newguy-london Date: Jun 7, 2001 9:17 AM EST Thanks for your feedback too. It confirmed a lot of things I thought about when I was hesitating what to go for last year. I think a great point you made is that your bosses tend to be quants themselves, and this is a great asset. Quants tend to have more respect for each other, as they went through the same shit when writing up their PhD. At any rate, the important thing is to enjoy your job. This makes the whole job worth it (together with the cash!). As it stands, I may not like mine as much as you do, and may swap at some point to a corporation, or even to the trading desk! : ) Good luck to you too. See you around on the messsage board. ----------------------- Interesting Author: z Date: Jun 5, 2001 11:53 AM EST Dave, Thanks for the valuable answer! It seems very challenging. If your normal day is abour 12 hrs, does it mean that you have to sit in front of the monitor for that long? And I know that you work in the front office in IB...So, the Quant from an IM is big different from IB? And since the most of the Quant are PHDs...What's the chance of a Master of Financial Engineering graduate? Thanks for your comments!!! ------------------------- Hi Author: Skiffster Date: Jun 6, 2001 4:36 AM EST Oops - didn't realise my information (much of which was out of date) was available for all to see. If somebody can tell me how to remove it I would be most grateful. In front of a monitor - yes 10-12 hours a day, every day. Occasional meetings are great chance to get away from the desk. See above for discussion of FE vs PhD. Good luck. ---------------------------- < Previous Message thanks Author: newguy-london Date: Jun 7, 2001 7:03 PM EST so are skiffster's comment, who knows lots about being a quant. : ) ==================================== Beware of Quant Positions Author: Vault Member Date: Mar 21, 2001 6:10 PM EST the only quant job worth doing is a prop trader once you do these quant jobs like risk management or analytics you will NEVER be able to move to front office Corporate Finance coverage which is where the bucks are. Only if you can get into a quant hedge fund do you have a chance to make the big money that IBankers do ================================== V. Good Author: Anonymous Date: Mar 1, 2001 6:54 PM EST Quant's became popular on Wall St. about 10 years ago. I left my science job 3 years ago and have a few comments * The money is incredible by science standards, but I would not describe it as "a hell of a lot more" than IB'ers. As a front-office quant you can expect a salary comparable to Traders, particularly if you hit a few "home-runs" during the year that give the traders an edge. * The best quant's are front-office guys who use their skills to give traders an "edge" through different methods (ie time-series analysis, discovery of predictors/indicators, development of new valuation techniques and structuring of derivatives). * Plenty of work for people with the right blend of skills (PhD in math/physics), attitude and financial knowledge. Be aware that the market is VERY competitive for these positions. The salary is a huge lure for many young scientists. * Typical quants start in the business after 2-3 years doing pure research. * There are some "financial engineering" courses starting up in the USA and UK. Typically they offer a Masters. I don't know anyone working in the business as a quant who took this path, but I'm sure it will become popular over time. Hope that helps ================================ what's the diff? Author: Vault Member Date: Feb 25, 2001 5:15 PM EST Seems like this site is dominated by NY bankers. I'm interested in moving to the West Coast. Are SF bankers more generally more laid back and are there fewer a-holes? Are hours just as bad? Also, is there an i-banking culture in SF between firms? ----------------------- i chose sf Author: Anonymous Date: Feb 28, 2001 11:58 AM EST after working in nyc, i decided that sf was for me. no one in ny gives any other bankers credit, so be ready to deal with their bs. and maybe i agree. sf definitely doesn't have the banking culture that nyc does. but is that good or bad? the hours are pretty much just as bad. but the worst part of it is that nothing in sf stays open late like in nyc. so you may get out of the office at 11p, but it might as well be 2a. some banks in sf don't even have security (like b of a, although i hesitate to call them an i-bank). you can just walk on up to their banking floors. that would never happen in nyc... maybe b/c they don't have any deals anyway. lol. but before making the switch to sf, i'd come visit. it's totally different. but if you like good weather and lax people, come out west! --------------------------- NY by far Author: Anonymous Date: Feb 28, 2001 12:01 PM EST Bankers in the Valley are perceived to be of the same stature as accountants. ============================= Princeton finance Author: Anonymous Date: Feb 22, 2001 10:32 PM EST its a new program but has distinguished names on the board like john reed (former citi ceo) and is backed by ssmb, morgan stanley and merrill. so they should have a seperate placement from the undergrads -------------------------- princeton Author: Vault Member Date: Feb 22, 2001 10:32 PM EST princeton's masters' program in finance was just created last year. considering it is just the inception of the program, you would not get as much respect and name recognition for your graduate studies when applying for your trading position upon graduation. the only thing that i can say in defense of our program here is that you are allowed, with the program's flexibility, to take a number of courses in the operations research & financial engineering program which (in my opinion at least) are much more geared towards traders than bankers. that is the only support i can give you for princeton. also maybe you want a change of scenery, having been in london for your undergrad already. -------------------------- Don't Forget Princeton Author: Anonymous Date: Feb 23, 2001 2:20 AM EST I don't think Princeton's program is as bad as some people have made it out to be. I think the job prospects after completing the program will be excellent for several reasons: -The department has a dedicated career services center. I know that most other MiF/FE programs don't have anything like this. -Princeton has no MBA program, which means that when companies recruit on campus you won't have MBA students competing with you. -Princeton is a top Ivy League school with a great reputation. They're not going to jeopardize this by hastily throwing together some dumbass "adhoc" program. I'm not saying that Princeton's MiF program is the best, but I do think it deserves to be ranked up there with other top MiF/FE programs like CM, NYU, Chicago, LSE, Stanford, & Berkeley. ------------------------- forget Princeton Author: Vault Member Date: Feb 23, 2001 12:14 AM EST MS in MAthematical Finance programs have mushroomed all over the place recently leveraging off the popularity of derivatives and trying to milk money off asipring traders and risk managers.. I'd be very careful if I were you in chosing to participate in one of those programs.. many of them are ad hoc and have very little to back them up aside from the name of the university they reside in and some big names on the board (frankly, being on the board means shit).. the 2 by far best programs out there that are worth a look are the programs at a) NYU Courant Institute of MAthematical Sciences b) Carnegie Mellon NYU's program is also the oldest one and is themost reputable.. Courant has been consistently ranked #1 in Applied MAth in the country.. I graduated from the program 1.5yrs ago and among my faculty I had Jeff Rosenbluth (ex head of Salomon's arbitrage desk), Bill Krasker (ex-partner of LTCM), Steve Allen (global head of Risk Management at JP Morgan Chase), MArco Avellaneda (one of the top guys in derivatives modeling world), Varadhan (a world-renown academician in PDE), etc.. outside of these 2 programs, stick to the more traditional ones such as MSc at LSE or MS in Econ at U Chicago.. forget about Princeton.. ---------------------- uh. Author: Anonymous Date: Feb 23, 2001 9:08 AM EST I know the guy who wrote that first message about being "on the board" and he meant "On board" Reed is a Visiting prof here. True, I'll Agree that NYU Courant and CMU (with Shreve) are tops (for now), but Princeton isn't going to enter into something it can't compete in. This isn't university of florida or dublin! they've made some other high profile hires this year like Ronnie Sircar (HUGE Stochastic Volatility Expert From Stanford). Paul Glasserman is visiting us this year from Columbia. Secondly, Many of my classmates were offered spots at those programs above, but made a conscious decision to come to a "Big Name" school... What's the value of Princeton v. Carnegie Mellon in the long run? So it's got potential. Besides, the comparison is between LSE and Princeton, and I looked at the LSE program, and didn't like the course offerings, Princeton has a way bigger selection from CS, Math, OR, Fin, Econ. Another thing to consider is proximity to New York... where do you want to work? London or Wall Street? ======================================== Positions for financial engineering Masters? Author: shk Date: Aug 24, 2001 10:48 AM EST Hi gurus, I am an IT guy considering career shift to financial sector. I've been looking at financial math/engineering masters programs. I read in this message board that most of quantitative analysis jobs are filled with PhD's, so naturally I got curious what kind of positions FE masters get upon graduation. I inquired this to one of the degree granting program and the reply was: their graduates get jobs in 1) risk management, 2) analytical support for trading desks, and 3) quantitative asset management. Being a novice in this, I'd like to hear what are the essential duties for those positions, and how people operate in those roles. Comments will be appreicated! ---------------------------------------- Simple Answer Author: Skiffster Date: Aug 25, 2001 2:44 PM EST Here is the simple answer to what you will do in each of these area's: 1) Risk Management Produce reports on VAR, CAR and other important measures of the risk-return profile of each desk. Take shit from traders at the end of the day/start of the next day when they see the "mark-to-market" and disagree with the valuation of their positions. 2) Analytical Support Calculate spreads, valuations, basically look for arb opportunities all day long. Great entry to trading, but it is a LONG hard road before you get an opportunity. 3) Quant asset management NFI - sounds like a long term risk management role. I would guess you would end up looking at the long term risk factors (ie scenario analysis as opposed to quant analysis). Hope this helps. Good luck. ============================ What makes a trader? Author: CEOGURU Date: Aug 17, 2001 2:58 PM EST I would like to know what makes a good trader? I know hull and slk when interviewing constantly throw out probably and statistic questions. If one has trouble answering such questions does that mean he/she isn't made for trading? I'm talking about equities and options. The reason I'm questioning the quantitative side for trading, of course derivatives etc you need great math skills, is I had an informational interview with a research analyst for a major fund. I had asked him about trading and he told me that old time traders (those who make it to their 30's) think all the technical stuff, formulas etc is bullshit. In fact in his office, there's this one guy who he thinks is "the thickest in the head" type of person he's ever met, but he's the best trader in the office. So basically, here it goes, I'm interested in trading but I know my quant skills aren't the greatest, but I do understand the different strategies as buying puts and calls, cover call writing etc, but because of the lack of skills in statistics and probability does that mean trading is not for me? Please give me your opinions on what are the true factors to a good trader. thanks -------------------------- re: Author: swinger Date: Aug 17, 2001 8:08 PM EST you dont necessarily need to be able to derive Black-Scholes in your sleep to be a good trader.. some of the non-quant skills and personality traits that are essential to being a good trader are discipline, appreciation for liquidity, understanding of how capital flows and information impacts the markets and confidence in one's opinions.. an understanding of fundamentals of probability/statistics are very important too as you will have to evaluate risks vs potential returns at all times.. ------------------------- trading Author: mit estate Date: Aug 19, 2001 11:59 PM EST the definition os a trader is pretty broad.. at a bank you could be the following: sales trader where you take customer orders and on an agency basis execute trades. market maker providing liquidity in a variety of markets from equity options to G10 govt bonds, Derviative trader where you could end up structing and managing the risk of customized product, or a prop trader where you use the banks balance sheet to make money. on the prop side you might be engaged in tax, index, merger or convertible bond arb. the majority of prop slots are pretty academic. when banks like to take risk they go for the sure thing by leveraging their balance sheet into an arb rather than punting futures contracts. most of the other trading jobs especially at a junior level require attention to detail and good interpersonal skills. an understanding of math is crucial to risk manage complex positions. while there are still guys on the street who trade by the seat of their pants trading is now dominated by people with quant skills. so my answer for you is maybe. there are trading jobs that don't require that much math and you can still beat the odds, but they are stacked against you. ----------------------- The little things Author: Gary Condit's Love Child Date: Aug 20, 2001 12:32 PM EST I'm not a banker, but I think this little bit of knowledge would probably help a lot- There's a part in the book 'Liar's Poker' where Lewis interviews one of Solomon's original mortgage guys, Bob Dall. Dall's first job at Solomon was 'buying money' for this MD, William Simon. One day, Dall was in the market to buy 50 million bucks @ 4%. But every time he would try and execute the trade, the sellers' price (i.e., interest rate) would rise, eventually increasing to 5%. So Dall goes back to Simon, and tells him about what's going on. 'So then sell 50 million at 5%', Simon told him. Dall did, several times, and when the market collapsed he was able to buy his 50 million back at the 4% he desired in the first place. So having read this, I think the most valuable trading skill you can possess is the ability to go WITH the market rather than forcibly prosecute a pre-set agenda. Another tidbit from the novel-successful traders trade ALWAYS, and let the trading personality permeate ever single facet of their lives. Everything is a risk/reward proposition. Before you become a trader, you must learn to think in this fashion. The reason that there are so few successful traders is that Americans are brought up to think exactly the opposite. Try applying the risk/reward logic next time you shop in a Gap and see what I mean. ----------------------------- trading Author: mit estate Date: Aug 20, 2001 12:01 AM EST one more thing, at a fund a trader is only executing for the PM.. sort of like a sales trader at a bank. therefore he's trading slippage rather than trying to create p&l on a book --------------------------- Please Define Quant Author: mbafinance Date: Aug 20, 2001 3:11 PM EST What level of quant skills are required to trade derivatives. PhD in Math/Eng/Hard Science or MBA/CFA and quant bend of mind.??? ------------------------- re: Author: swinger Date: Aug 20, 2001 8:56 PM EST you definetely do not need a PhD to trade but an analytical mind, solid background in probability/statistics and perhaps a science or engineering background certainly do come handy.. as one of my colleagues likes to say: "you can be a quantum physics geek and be able to calculate gradients and do a monte carlo in your head, but at the end of the day it's a call - BUY or SELL" ------------------------- deriv trading Author: mit estate Date: Aug 21, 2001 12:28 AM EST i have a degree in mathematics.. i would say that most of my colleagues have math/engineering backgrounds.. you don't need a phd, but it can help.. Susquehanna, DE Shaw, the old Oconnor are firms that favor quantitative backgrounds.. ---------------------------- SLK is not quant Author: Pimp Diddy Date: Aug 21, 2001 1:24 AM EST >>>I know hull and slk when interviewing constantly throw out probably and statistic questions.<<< Hull yes, SLK no. SLK is more personality-focused and tends to hire traders with the classic trader mentality rather than quants. Try Susquehanna, Hull, or DE Shaw if you're into statistics. ------------------------------ Traders Mentality Author: CEOGURU Date: Aug 24, 2001 8:02 PM EST what other firms tend to focus on the traders mentality? thanks ------------------------------ Most Wall Street firms Author: Pimp Diddy Date: Aug 25, 2001 6:23 PM EST Most Wall Street firms that don't focus on niche markets look for the same qualities. When I was interviewing I especially liked Merrill Lynch and CSFB in comparison to SLK. ===================================== Positions for financial engineering Masters? Author: shk Date: Aug 24, 2001 10:48 AM EST Hi gurus, I am an IT guy considering career shift to financial sector. I've been looking at financial math/engineering masters programs. I read in this message board that most of quantitative analysis jobs are filled with PhD's, so naturally I got curious what kind of positions FE masters get upon graduation. I inquired this to one of the degree granting program and the reply was: their graduates get jobs in 1) risk management, 2) analytical support for trading desks, and 3) quantitative asset management. Being a novice in this, I'd like to hear what are the essential duties for those positions, and how people operate in those roles. Comments will be appreicated! -------------------------------- Simple Answer Author: Skiffster Date: Aug 25, 2001 2:44 PM EST Here is the simple answer to what you will do in each of these area's: 1) Risk Management Produce reports on VAR, CAR and other important measures of the risk-return profile of each desk. Take shit from traders at the end of the day/start of the next day when they see the "mark-to-market" and disagree with the valuation of their positions. 2) Analytical Support Calculate spreads, valuations, basically look for arb opportunities all day long. Great entry to trading, but it is a LONG hard road before you get an opportunity. 3) Quant asset management NFI - sounds like a long term risk management role. I would guess you would end up looking at the long term risk factors (ie scenario analysis as opposed to quant analysis). Hope this helps. Good luck.