hi, i know that a number prop firms who recruit trader trainees.. and I have attented 1 of these tests and have 1 with optiver coming next month - but im going to cancel it because I know what the test is like now and im not going to waste my time. my question is this, seriously: do you really have to be a math-genius to be a good trader/work for these guys? i think its bollox. what the hell does lightning arithmetic skills have anything to do with trading? sure you need to have a mathematical mind, and be good at math generally - but the people they look for are true geniuses.. I mean the test I sat before was like 80 questions in 4 minutes. and optivers test is even harder - 80 questions in 8 minutes, -1 for wrong answers, -2 for missed questions and u gotta get like 55 just to go to the 2nd and 3rd tests.. its just ridiculous. For me, trading is most importantly a matter of good judgment. a math genius can never be a successful trader if he or she cannot make good judgements, has no sense of value of the product and timing. now can anyone tell me how figuring out 45/35 - 23/53 in 5 seconds makes a good trader? Thanks.
1) It's a barrier to entry. They're hiring grads with zero practical experience. Their intent is to produce sheet monkeys, not to hire track records. 2) Quick algebraic/arithmetic ability can mean the difference between making and missing the opportunity to fill paper that enters the pit/post.
i has a clerk on the cboe years ago... had a hard time putting in a stock order correctly... nice guy...brilliant... turns out he made millions in bonds...andy kreiger you never know...
Just answer 68 questions correctly and enter 1 for all of the rest of the questions. Since you have twice the time of your first test, you will find that everything works out. When they see you used a method to do the test, they will probably always remember you. And you have a "story" for your 3rd interview.
i don't quite get it.. how the hell in my wildest dream can i get 68 questions correctly? can u explain what u mean, hmm.. "*During this test meeting your numerical skills will be tested. It is a paper-based test with a strict time-limit, in which you will have to complete the calculations as quickly and accurately as possible. You are not allowed to use a calculator. The first test is decisive and a very strict norm is applied. Only if you pass the first numerical test (which takes only 8 minutes) you can proceed with a second and third test (total time for making 3 tests is about 1 hour). The test(s) do(es) not contain any option constructions etc. as you do not have to have this knowledge when starting as a market maker with Optiver. In relation with our company policy you can try to pass the test(s) just one time and we do not provide example questions. After passing all three tests with good results, you will be invited for interviews."
lol hahaha.. wots funny is, there are actually some who pass and go to final round interview all the way to holland and get fried by some assholes.. i personally think theyr just bored they just wanna have a laugh.. hehe
is it the same guy? he was a clerk!!!!? Apocalypse Roulette: An Excerpt In 1986, [Bankers Trust] hired a young currency options trader from Salomon Brothers called Andy Krieger who had graduated from the Wharton School after studying Sanskrit and philosophy at the University of Pennsylvania. He quickly became one of the most aggressive dealers in the world, with the full sanction of Bankers. While most of the bankâs currency traders had an upper dealing limit of $50 million, Kriegerâs was in the region of $700 millionâaround a quarter of the bankâs capital at the time. By using options, Krieger could leverage this exposure to many times that size ($100,000 of currency options would buy control of $30 million to $40 million in actual currency). In 1987 he did this to launch a speculative attack on the New Zealand dollar. If his own claims can be believed, he sold short the entire money supply of the country. In a matter of hours, the NZ dollar plunged 5 percent against the U.S. dollar. It was enough, at any rate, to draw an angry complaint from the New Zealand central bank. But with typical arrogance, Sanford later turned this on its head. âWe didnât take too big a position for Bankers Trust,â he grumbled, âbut we may have taken too big a position for that market.â It was New Zealandâs fault, in other words, for being too small to cope with Bankers. Krieger resigned the following year in disgust at the ingratitude of his employers who had paid him a mere $3 million for his efforts which had netted the bank a profit of more than $300 million. But after his departure an odd thing happened. Regulators discovered discrepancies in the way Bankers valued its currency options portfolio. The bank was forced to admit that $80 million of foreign exchange trading income had disappeared and that it had deliberately overstated its 1986 earnings. It seemed, on the face of it, that the bank had been simply unable to understand Kriegerâs complex options positions. Dealers in other banks, however, wondered how it was that Kriegerâs options portfolio only maintained its value as long as Krieger himself was in charge of it. Whatever the reason for the readjusted profit, the whole episode was a serious embarrassment. An even bigger embarrassment, though, should have been that Bankers had been willing deliberately to publish figures that were inaccurate by $80 million as if it didnât matter. But the bank showed no sign of blushing. This was yet another warning of its attitude: anything goes as long as the suckers donât find out. Bankers was lean and very, very mean and there were no bigger suckers in sight than in the derivatives markets. Excerpted from Apocalypse Roulette: The Lethal World of Derivatives, by Richard Thomson. Reprinted with permission by the publisher, MacMillan U.K.
============== BaTman; Doesnt have much of anything to do with trading wisely from a home office, so agree with you on that.Preparation counts more However for a market maker or scalper style ; think they are on the right track