Do you want to be a quant for the love of the science, the love of money, or perhaps a combination of the two? Not that any of those motivations are wrong, just be aware that if it is for the love of money, you'll never get rich working for someone else.
Tell that to the desk quants who are took home $1MM this march, or the otc dealers who brought home $20MM last year. This retail bravado is just silly. Transfer to rutgers? As much as I think Baruch is a shit school (nothing personal - I do know people who went there; and there is one guy I recall that did end up on the desk by the time he hit 30), rutgers is not really any better. It's a slightly less brown shade of shit. You want to transfer? Transfer to NYU - nothing fantastic, but it does have standing. Then, trade up; NYU might sound silly and it's pretty expensive, but their econ program (the theoretical econ track) has a VERY good track record of send their kids to top doctorate and masters programs. You want a ballsy trade, that's one for you. Would you rather hang out with the "how do I scrap up 5K to trade prop" crowd here or the "cocktail at the metropolitan museum tonight? crap - I'm seeing another client at nobu" group (bonus point if you or anyone can figure out what that's in reference to). Seriously, forget quant - forget majoring 2 degrees and minoring 2 - that's actually not good for you. It makes you look unfocused. But hey, don't listen to me - I'm just another talking head in this silly forum that you are moderating; buy the dip and scalp your way to riches while the rest of the actual finance world move by without you knowing.
Actually Baruch is not half bad. Ok, you got a point about NYU being better. Yeah, Baruch can do better in some case...fine I give up I say it is right in the middle of the pole. Actually, I love trading but I am more interested with theories how it is done etc. Call me more education loving than money loving person. ALthough I love money dont get me wrong. If I had money I would be in Harvard right now ! But, you know. I just see quant as a better alternative for my overall happiness. Logically speaking that is. Decent amount of money with intellectual and productive outcomes. Killing two birds with a shotgun. (Logically, it does not make sense to kill two birds with one stone ) Nobu that Japanese restaurant on Park Ave.?
Rankings of course are very subjective. By no means would I call Baruch a "shit school" . Their MFE program is quite well rounded and has a good reputation. That being said, the reality in the financial world is that "classism" is always present. Who you know, where you went to school, what program you were in, age, etc, etc all put you in a particular social circles. The contacts, prestige, etc of the Ivy's for example will carry you much further than that of a lesser school. Right or wrong, this is the way it is. That doesn't mean you can't do extremely well if you don't fit a certain profile. So aim high but don't regret it if you don't go to an Ivy. Besides the other sites I mentioned go to quantnet. The best thing you can do for yourself is to try and meet some people and see what direction(s) interest you. Life isn't all about $...if you don't get into an Ivy and start at GS it's not the end of the world....unless you hate what you're doing. Just pursue your passion and you will always have some level of satisfaction with or without the money.
rateesquad, you really should consider this advice. from your posts in this thread i'm not sure you picture properly who your up against in this area....the best of the best phds from the best tech schools....the best of the best from the ivy's with their ivy network behind them...
There is a new book you might want to look at by Barry Schachter entitled "How I Became a Quant" in which each chapter is devoted to a name in the field. One common theme: math, math and more math. The more you know the easier time you will have. The rub a while ago against econ and finance majors in the field is that their math skills were not up to those from physics. I don't know if that is the case anymore. For econ., applicants accepted to the top schools pretty much have 800s on math GRE. I doubt that expectations for scores are much less for what you are trying to do. As to the NYU trade the econ dept. has recently upgraded with new graduate faculty in a bid to be a top-tier school. In the past it was pretty bad and disorganized. Studying econ will not help you become a quant. A great NYU trade would be to go to Courant, which also has fin. math guys on the faculty.
you'd have to agree though that a gre 800, impressive, is not math. Most fin math professors themselves would agree that the math maturity required for a msc isn't high. lol, i mean how do you think they let in econ, cs, and engineering majors? Its difficult, but compared to the weed out course for undergrads, analysis, its not advanced. this is like comparing a pre-med taking o-chem to an ochem major; the guy's smart, but his "chemistry" skills aren't really impressing anyone. but yah, some of those econ programs in the UK have a surprising amount of math in them ( i just wouldn't expect some econ kid in the states to take even ode's for fun...like maybe linear algebra just because, but its more likely completely practical and not a bunch of proofs over and over and over.. wouldn't u agree?
What in the world are you talking about... I don't think anywhere here is claiming that gre 800 math is sufficient. 780+ is, however, necessary. quant math is quite difficult.... lots of real analysis, optimization, pde, stochastic calc, etc... in some cases it's pretty specialized (fixed points come to mind). obviously, you aren't expected to know all this going into a grad program (though you'd be surprised that certain econ programs do cover them), but you'll learn. However, the problem with a lot of masters terminating program (as opposed to phd termination) is that these programs try very hard to cover all the areas fast, and leave a shallow understanding of a lot of stuff for students that don't care to dig too deeply.
bernoulli was just saying that econ folks have some math ability. i'm saying sure an 800 is impressive. its impressive in that i respect it. but its not math. it doesn't mean it takes a lot of mathematical maturity lol. like the optiver math or shall i say, arithmetic test. its like the spelling bee. its impressive to me, but its not like these little kids are edgar allen poe. no math professor would ever claim that the master level mathematics in fin math is that advanced. so i think we agree. (u know that i'm not saying fin math isn't difficult. of course its difficult. my math prof once said he could make an algebra test nobody could pass. in fact, he did it once. fin math at the msc level is not that advanced/complex. two different things to most anyone.)
"The rub a while ago against econ and finance majors in the field is that their math skills were not up to those from physics. I don't know if that is the case anymore. For econ., applicants accepted to the top schools pretty much have 800s on math GRE" thats the part i don't necessarily agree with.