QuoteOriginally posted by: StatGuyCandidates put a lot of stuff on their CV to look impressive, but beware when you put stuff like C++ or VBA on the CV it suggest that you really know these languages past printing "hello world" to the console. You could get fried with questions on policy designs, memory allocation in C++, differences between compliers etc.. These things will take time to learn, so the interviewer would know if you really know C++ past a month revising the syntax or someone who has had many years implementing some tough algorithms which is part of a huge project with lots of crap code etc.. Having a PhD is fast becoming a requirement in the quant field. Your academics are good and you could probably get into some quant position, but I suspect to get into the more lucrative areas you will probably need a PhD in future. 10 years ago you would have managed it, but now there are more geeks out there with PhDs and more masters , bse etc. I see a time when PhDs will be as common as masters degrees today.Stats GuyI strongly disagree. I thought that a PhD is a must, too, and was seriously considering to start a PhD programm (so far I have a MSc in mathematics and a diploma (i.e. the German version of the MSc) in Business Mathematics)). However, seeking for advise a talked to people at two major banks (HR and quants) , to several professors in Financial Mathematics and to one of the partners of a leading quantitative finance & risk consulting company and asked them if a PhD is neccessary or at least a big plus for a career in quantitative finance or risk management. Well, all answered that it wasn't a key requirement as long as you had the skills which you can also learn on the job. According to the prof I talked to there were three major reason for doing a PhD: To satisfy your scientific interest, to boost your ego and to have the option to teach when you have seen enough of business. But it will not promote your career, he said, compared to the alternative track of learning three years on the job.Further, according to my insight in the daily work of quants in banking and risk consulting, nobody really deals with mathematical tools you haven't seen yet as a good MSc-graduate. And as the people I interviewed said, nobody holds you back to read some math books while being employed to close some knowledge gaps just in time.So basically I would state doing a PhD is an alternative track to get a quant role, but not better than starting to work with an MSc. It is just a personal decision what one prefers. I admit that perhaps PhD studies might be more fun than three more years of work in life - but that depends on your character.