kant Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I would recommend a financial engineering program > for you, not the CFA. The CFA won’t hurt, it just > might not be as helpful. And I think you’ll like > the FE program more. An MFE for a guy with a Ph.D. in physics would be pretty easy.
mo34 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 2x2 > > I actually considered the MBA route, but I just > could not imagine going back to school after the > Ph.D. I later realized that I made the right > decision. My wife started her MBA at UCLA last > year and her classes are nothing more than BS on > top of some more BS. Just a lot of talk and team > projects, case studies, presentations, … and > very little substance. I am not sure that by the > time she graduates next year, she will actually be > able to translate a balance sheet or price a swap > or do anything useful. > > In my opinion, for someone with a Ph.D in Physics, > an MBA would be a total waste of time and money. > > As far as resources, the CFA will cost about $5000 > all included, while the MBA will cost at least > $70000 + time wasted in the classroom. Hmm… I think you misunderstand what MBA is for. It is not desgined for people to learn stuff (actually many people who get into top programs already know all those things). It is for partying and fun (aka networking) such that the friends you made during that time can be useful later to your career. If you just want to be a pure quant without dealing with people, then MBA is a waste of time
ymc Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > If you just want to be a pure quant without > dealing with people, then MBA is a waste of time Exactly my point. When someone hires a Ph.D in math or physics, it’s not for their “people’s skills”. I personally go through long periods of time without saying a word to anyone at work (may be 2-3 days in a row).
IMHO, both an MBA and an MFE (this is a degree for people who want quant jobs, but don’t want to take the time to do a PhD in Physics or App. Math) would be horrible decisions for you. Listen to the guy who got the job after LI, and in all honesty, you should get your career advice from Wimott instead of this site. This site isn’t exactly quant focused by any means.
Hello mo34, I have been pursuing similar path for about a year. I feel that I have reached a stage that I am ready to get some interviews. If you do not mind, I would like to ask some more questions about how you get your job. My email:weilin.qj@gmail.com Thanks! George
I agree about the general MBA bieng nothing more than a Bsc. However, you can’t compare Physics with Finance. What does Physics has to do with Finance except for a couple of formulas ? I see a lot of people who think that knowing physics means knowing math which means knowing finance stuff. Don’t dispair. PhD in Physics combined with L1/L2 should do the work but for more research-oriented job. The only problem is that citi recently cut thousands of jobs incl. analysts. Others did that as well. But still, PhD is PhD. One last point. Correct me if I’m wrong but PhD requires a lot of teaching. If you can’t find interpersonal skills there then where ?
2x2equals4 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > One last point. Correct me if I’m wrong but PhD > requires a lot of teaching. If you can’t find > interpersonal skills there then where ? It depends on how much time you spent as a TA (Teaching Assistant) or an RA (Research Assistant). Some people only work as an RA
2x2equals4 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > One last point. Correct me if I’m wrong but PhD > requires a lot of teaching. If you can’t find > interpersonal skills there then where ? I was a RA for 4 years my only teaching duties where limited to grading tests and homeworks. Actually based on my experience, most of the Teaching Assistantships are reserved for US citizens (for communication reasons I guess), 95% of foreigners here are on RA stuck in a lab in a basement somewhere.
If I had a PhD in Physics, I would devise a trend following system, write some algorithms and watch the money roll in. The man who started and still runs Renaissance Hedge Funds, Jim Simons did just that. Or, if you are not ready to go out on your own just yet, give Jim a call. 70% of the people he hires are mathematicians and physicists with no knowledge or understanding of finance. I think a common misconception about financial markets is that you have to understand them to make money… You don’t.
a few thoughts. MBA and MFE aren’t bad ideas, but I entirely understand the feeling of “I’ve been in school enough already!” In any case, its too late to apply for Autumn 2008 enrollment, whereas you can start the CFA now (and should not delay any more if you want to sit for the June exam). If you get a job before the next applications season, forget the MBA or MFE route. Your experience and degrees are almost certainly enough. If you are still looking then, maybe then apply. The most immediate advantage of these programs is that they have career centers designed to help find you a job, and the network of friends and alumni is good. Also try applying at DE Shaw. They like highly mathematical types and are often willing to train you on their approach.
DE Shaw is the hardest quant firm to get into. I think the FRM might have an advantage over the CFA for someone making this transition, anyone agree? It is only one exam and covers a lot of the same topics. It also focuses more on quant finance at the expense of accounting, but thats not likely to hurt a quant analyst.
due vigilance Wrote: I think a > common misconception about financial markets is > that you have to understand them to make money… > You don’t. AHAHAHA! That one made me almost fall over… But seriously to the OP, you just finished a PhD in Physics, the last thing you need is ANOTHER degree right now. Just hit the pavement and network.
James Simons knowledge of capital markets is pretty good…
I mean the way I see it is that a Ph.D., in Physics is about top of the line as a resume can get. I mean the only thing I could see topping it is you being awarded a Nobel Prize for discovering Willyonium and I definitely view the CFA as a major major competitive advantage for you. Of course whlie the CFA is one tough tough investment designation, its nothing like graduate level physics. So unless you got your stripes at the University of Phoenix Online, you should be more than capable of landing a pretty major gig somewhere…well…like for instance…apparently they’re hiring a programmer. http://www.rentec.com/ Willy
I mean they say it all in that one job post… “Extremely high compensation…$150,000 to $250,000 in year 1”. Next question? Willy
Very interesting thread I might add for an aspiring quant 
I’m in a somewhat similar position in that I’m studying for a PhD Finance currently but am realizing that I will likely lack some of the accounting contained in the CFA so I plan to get it at some point to add another ABC after my name. Concerning your first quant position, I really think it’s just a matter of networking since there are no formal recruiting processes like MBAs have… Might I suggest Nuclear Phynance as an alternative to Wilmott? It’s full of some really intelligent yet friendly people who have provided me with some great advice. Oh, and I agree entirely with the worthless nature of MBAs… Why can’t one just purchase the diploma?.. (On second though, online MBAs seem to do exactly that
Does George W Bush have an MBA? How can you say they are worthless?
Point well taken JoeyD Honestly though, I’m not sure I could pursue a physics PhD unless I was damn sure I wanted to be a physicist of some sort. As I understand it, a physics doctorate usually takes more than DOUBLE the 4-5 years that is common for a finance one. As it stands, I’m not so sure I won’t be sick of financial economics by graduation even though it’s my passion 
Oh, and I’d miss the informal culture of academia I love so much. Is there even such a thing as a relaxed finance culture?..
If there’s real money on the line, I doubt you have a lot of “relaxed” culture. But I’ve seen a lot of “intellectual culture,” especially around the quant fields, but also in the global markets/strategy areas.
Intellectual culture is just fine. I just can’t stand the masters of the universe BSDs that i-banks seem to attract Seriously, I’ll never understand how people think they’re God’s gift to this earth just because they can make a pretty pitch book…