you can’t compare the two, the difficulty of degrees / phds varies hugely (mainly depending on the institution you study at)
MD > CFA
Man Frank you are a trip. I like you.
I don’t have a doctorate, and I don’t plan on pursuing one. I just got out of a luncheon with a bunch of economists talking about whether or not inflation is present or whether the outcomes of what the central banks (globally at this point) could be anything but inflationary. As someone who works in academia can probably already guess it turned into an argument over semantics pretty soon. Just a bunch of old farts (male and female) arguing minutiae of the constituents involved in the calculation of various terms, how certain definitions of terms like “savings” are so misapplied and vastly misunderstood… For me it was very frustrating and asinine. There wasn’t one thing that the presenter talked about or that the rest of the group began to “discuss”/argue that isn’t already well understood by most people who are at a trading desk, banking position. I was really trying to keep an open mind and watch and listen to these academics talk without getting overly negative. I suppose for them getting into the raison d’etre of what appeared to me as arguing semantics was/is very stimulating. I kept wanting to chime in and ask what the practical application of any of this is in making money, in determining effective policy for getting out of the current problem. Of course I didn’t because 1) I can’t compete with these guys as I’m not trained at the same level of research statistical methods they are -and no I don’t think level 2 quant material holds a candle to what they do in this respect 2) insecurity more or less, I didn’t want to look like an idiot in front of everyone 3) I honestly just found their discussion boring. I look for the practical application and how to earn positive real after tax returns given a macro condition that isn’t showing up in the rate structure but is in asset prices, so that’s why I’m interested in the charter. They are more interested in what inflation really is and using various theory to try and support their hypothesis, -some really just seemed like they were really only arguing semantics and involved in nothing but a “dick measuring contest”, but that’s their trip and what floats their boat and why they are in academia and “researchers”. I don’t see why it matters whats harder, but there I go being practical again. I’ve probably really offended some PhDs now, and I really didn’t mean to just my two meager cents. By the way one of the partners at the firm I work at is a Professor and is a really brilliant guy and I love talking with him and having him mentor me, but he has actually worked in the money management/ risk management world as well so I think that’s why we get along, there are other professors that have not and are more like the guys/gals I described above and may know a lot but I don’t think it’s about anything that anyone outside of academia cares about or really matters outside of academia.
this was an interesting thread given how the majority of the comments have ZERO truth. After my Master’s, I was looking heavily into PhD in Finance (and still am considering it)…What scares me from doing it, is the QUANTITATIVE requirements, and VERY HIGH FAILURE RATE. as some have thankfully mentioned, the program actually has a very high attrition rate…The standard program (canada, and I’m assuming US?) has 2 years of course work then prior to the Thesis you have to pass the Comprehensive exam. This exam kicks many people out of the program but apparently at good schools, they atleast give you a ‘masters’ degree for the work you have accomplished up to that point. CFA should not be compared to a PhD in Finance haha…CFA is a joke compared to the the curriculum, not to mention how different it is.
oops, by thesis I meant dissertation…I think a PhD in Finance would be incredible…the lifestyle of a professor is where it’s at (not too mention the great pay if you decide not to go academia route)
@Andrew - I enjoyed your post. I would have enjoyed it more had you used paragraphs. Edit: Don’t ever feel inadequate around academics/economists. You’re better.
Great post Andrew 
+1 for the paragraphs, and a great post Andrew
Hi all,
Interesting discussion. My 2 cents
Ii have a Masters in Computer Science and Electrical Engineering from one of the worlds leading engineering schools. I also have an MBA with focus on general management /business administration. On top of this I have over 8 years experience from software engenieering and quantitative development/modeling. I work for a large wellknown bank.
In September 2012 I decided to sign up for the CFA. Did level 1 in December and Level 2 now in June 2013.
For me, the CFA program has been the greatest challenge of my life, and also one of the most rewarding experiences at the same time. It’s a massive memory and discipline test.
For comparison - I got straight As in the MBA, putting in less time for the whole program then I did for CFA level 1.
Engineering school had harder Maths and much more difficult problems to solve, but completing the degree was still easier as you have 12 exams per year, can bring formulas and you solve 5-10 problems over 4 hours per exam, and you study full time…
First, why the hell are you bringing up this old arse thread. I got all excited that some of the old school guys were back. Second, you’re on crack saying that the cfa is harder than an EE degree from a top program. The engineering college I went to was decent (ranked top 3 consistantly in aerospace though) and ate students alive, me included. I was also in EE and ended up calling it quits in my third year.
CFA is not difficult. If you put in the time, you’ll be fine.
Interesting thread.
I think a number of us pursue the CFA as a practical alternative to a PhD, in the sense that we are thirsty for continued learning yet do not wish to get disconnected from our careers by pursuing a full time PhD.
My pet peeve? I think a new degree should be created somewhere between a Ms and a PhD. Given the strong educational inflation we have experienced over the past decade, in most fields a masters is now the new bachelor degree. People often want to go further but the academic emphasis of the PhD is a deterrent. So instead they get two masters or more, or pursue professional designations like the CFA. It gives you that extra ‘oomph’, that added credential, without requiring a hyatus and a severe income cut.
I often daydream about a PhD - the ultimate intellectual treat in my mind, except maybe for writing a book - but for now the CFA is filling that gap quite satisfactorily. I have a lot of respect for the currriculum and the challenges it offers.
As for the whole CFA vs PhD debate, I would tend to rate a PhD higher, at least a PhD from a top school. For one thing a PhD is recognized more broadly across nations and professions, whereas the CFA designation hasn’t yet achieved the same recognition outside of specialized circles. In other words your immediate colleagues may appreciate its value, but colleagues in other areas of the firm may not. A PhD or doctorate, on the other hand, tends to have a rather universal appeal and recognition. Secondly, a PhD - no matter the field - tends to require more creative thinking, better communication skills and often more advanced problem-solving skills. It’s one thing to solve vignettes, it’s a whole other thing to develop a novel research method, to analyze mountains of data and to draw innovative conclusions.
Now the catch is that the CFA is standardized, and a PhD is not. With the CFA, for better or for worse, you know exactly what you get, and you know all charterholders met the same criteria. With a PhD, on the other hand, it depends heavily on the program you attended, the field you chose and even your area of focus.
Last but not least, for both of them, a crucial element is what you make of them and how they fit with your other experiences… Which is why this whole question is almost impossible to answer as a group, but hopefully we find the answers that are right for us as individuals!
according to the NQF, the UK’s credit transfer system, completing the CFA program is equal to Level 7 and is in the same league as MS, MBA or medical degree. is there really much difference between the two? if you’re sure about being in finance, get the CFA as it a more focused and more cost effective program. if not, get something general like an MBA. if you’re looking at possibly getting into acedemia, get an MFin. CFA comes below a doctoral program as it should. there should be no doubt that PhD > CFA > Tier 2 or less MS/MBA in both recognition and difficulty, at least on the Street.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Qualifications_Framework
http://www.cfainstitute.org/ethics/regulatory/benchmark/Pages/cfa_program.aspx
They do have a designation between the MS and the Ph.D. : it’s called ABD.
In terms of course substance, there is really not that much difference between what you learn in an MS program and a Ph.D. Program. The difference is whether you have completed an original research project that has added to the knowledge base of the world. To the extent that the coursework is different at all, the Ph.D. Might have courses that emphasize research methods a little more, as well as a little more abstract theory, whereas a terminal masters’ program might emphasize more practical applications for a business or industry context.
Technically you’re right, of course, but most people wouldn’t view an ABD as a full-fledged degree.
My understanding is that to complete a PhD you must invest or prove that something exsist that wasent previously known or proven respectively.
You cant fail a PhD but you can be denied entry if no one wnats to sponsor your research/fund you etc… You need a strong argument to even start.
Lots of great comments here! All I’ll add is that you should be able to finish a PhD program MUCH faster than you will normally be able to finish the requirements for a CFA. You should be able to finish a PhD in finance in about 4-5 years. The CFA could drag on for 15, or 20, or more.
I have a finance PhD from a 2nd tier school (hand me the hacksaw). Just the math and econometrics was far more difficult than anything in the CFA curriculum. But it’s not true that no one fails a PhD. First off, the coursework is significantly more difficult than anything you’d see in most masters programs (in fact, I had to drop one seminar and take about a year of remedial math to handle some of the stuff (measure theory-heavy probability) in one of my seminars. After two years of coursework, you typically spend 3-5 months studying for your comprehensive exams, which are basically eight hours (4/4). My comps involved 6 (pick 4) questions in the morning and 6 (pick 4) in the afternoon.
All in all, becasue I had to repeat one seminar, it took me almost 3 1/2 years until I started on the dissertation. Once I started, it took me about a year and a half to finish.
CFA, on the other hand, was pretty straightforward. But that had a lot to do with the fact that I’d taught a lot of the L1 and L2 material in various classes.
In case you’re interested, here’s a pretty good piece describing what goes on in a typical finance doctoral program:
http://financialrounds.blogspot.com/2006/07/whats-involved-in-getting-phd-in.html
You are an engineer learning some new stuff. The majority of people taking CFA would have taken at least some basic college classes in finance.
Do you think that your average CFA (finance background person) would struggle more or less if, after finishing the CFA, they decided to take up a new field of study, doing an MSc in Computer Engineering?