On average a front office quant dev in London earns£114 K base£38 K bonus£ 7K non pay benefits

I suggest you get a quant to check those numbers...

These are the mean? What is the std dev? How about the distribution by experience?

QuoteOriginally posted by: QuantOrDieI suggest you get a quant to check those numbers...lol this guy again. You do know who Dominic is?

QuoteOriginally posted by: ThinkDifferentQuoteOriginally posted by: QuantOrDieI suggest you get a quant to check those numbers...lol this guy again. You do know who Dominic is?The quoted base is very large, unless it is for 4+ years of experience.

Eager to see results from quant analysts / quant researchers now. And I would dare to ask Dominic if he thinks the new mood in the UK (stagflation, more risk management vs less leverage) is going to affect these numbers in the near future.I still think that on a global level we are quickly going towards a uniform $ 700-800 / month salary for the average Joe / Youssuf / Zhu (with many tears this western side of the world) and am curious to understand how he thinks the financial hub in London, at its own different scale, is going to resist this trend.

QuoteOriginally posted by: ThinkDifferentQuoteOriginally posted by: QuantOrDieI suggest you get a quant to check those numbers...lol this guy again. You do know who Dominic is?There is an element of inconsistency here. In Dominic's earlier post (e.g. quant dev in various US cities) the headline number = base + bonus + other benefit. In the latest NY FO quant dev post, the headline number = base. And for the London FO quant dev, it is neither. I understand these are preliminary numbers in a blog format. I also understand many underpay members are prepared to show these salary surveys "unintentionally" to their managers as soon as practical (me included ). Maybe we should have a bit of patience and wait for the finalised version.

QuoteOriginally posted by: mrmisterQuoteOriginally posted by: ThinkDifferentQuoteOriginally posted by: QuantOrDieI suggest you get a quant to check those numbers...lol this guy again. You do know who Dominic is?The quoted base is very large, unless it is for 4+ years of experience.My guess it's skewed by quant devs on contracts etc that don't get a bonus but get a much higher base.

A few bits of context here...This latest drop of numbers is for the "headline" of what people see themselves as, I'm trying to separate "management rank" from function.There is also a known effect that you may think of yourself as a QD, but if you're in an IT department you will be paid less than in other departments.That means an MD who cuts code and bosses around other quant developers is a QD, even if his job title says he is management, so the average numbers are actually lower than I had expected.If you were to sample people whose business card said "Quant Developer" you'd get a lower range.This why there are boxes on the survey to separate IT QDs from FO QDs since in every observable attribute they may be identical but being in an IT department will knock a chunk off your pay, especially in bonus.Yes, we are checking these numbers and I'm not in any way offended be the suggestion that I need to double check.I am at heart a scientist and that requires the discipline of exposing your results to open discussion.Also I hope I don't need to explain that the value of data is a function of how unexpected it is.I'm showing them because I want a reality check since I'm in unexplored territory here. I've looked quite hard and there is not one decent data source to compare my results against, in fact at first I thought there were literally none, until I signed an NDA and got numbers that made me laugh. My numbers cannot be perfect, but they're going to be better than anyone else's by a serious margin.

That's maybe a very stupid and naive idea but is there any governmental statistical agency is UK ? I mean everybody would have to declare salary and bonus to the state for taxes purpose so they should have the numbers. At the question : Will they share with you? I don't think so but who knows, ask and you will see.

QuoteOriginally posted by: mrmisterQuoteOriginally posted by: ThinkDifferentQuoteOriginally posted by: QuantOrDieI suggest you get a quant to check those numbers...lol this guy again. You do know who Dominic is?The quoted base is very large, unless it is for 4+ years of experience.Could be. My comment was more related to what he was saying in other thread, claiming that mid office (model val, risk etc.) relatively junior quants at his ibank getting > 100% bonuses.

QuoteOriginally posted by: ThinkDifferentQuoteOriginally posted by: QuantOrDieI suggest you get a quant to check those numbers...lol this guy again. You do know who Dominic is?Yes. I also know that there is no selection of {114,38,7} that sums to 144

QuoteOriginally posted by: ThinkDifferentQuoteOriginally posted by: mrmisterQuoteOriginally posted by: ThinkDifferentQuoteOriginally posted by: QuantOrDieI suggest you get a quant to check those numbers...lol this guy again. You do know who Dominic is?The quoted base is very large, unless it is for 4+ years of experience.Could be. My comment was more related to what he was saying in other thread, claiming that mid office (model val, risk etc.) relatively junior quants at his ibank getting > 100% bonuses.I am willing to accept that my sample may not be statistically representative. On the other hand, perhaps you should also accept the same about yourself. After all, somebody has to be in the lowest quartile...

Thx Dominic and moreover thx two all people who filled out your online form. Any chance of details at least qualitative incite into these numbers. Like Hansi said I assume bulk of people who submitted data were contractors. If this that case and I assume it is then if take straight average the could always re-weight according to how many actually employed in each sub-job grouping (at least between regular bank employees and bank contractors). All good if published both since in contract and employee camp marked difference between gross and net income... Not to mention marked difference between more 'employed situation' and more 'pure speculator' where you eat what you catch not what the boss pays you.