I'm currently employed in the middle office of a large bank. I've recently been approached by a small (but rapidly expanding) brokerage looking for someone to add some quantitative rigor to their operations (they have survived for five or so years without a quant on staff, but are now feeling the need to hire one). The base salary I've been offered is somewhat higher than what I'm making, but without the bank's guaranteed bonus, making total compensation about equal. I'd be more or less in charge of their modeling (reporting directly to the CEO) in the new position.Now for my questions...To the recruiters out there: I've been with my current employer for just under a year. I was with my previous employer for 18 months. Is the appearance of "job hopping" likely to be detrimental in the future?I'd eventually like to get a front office position in a larger outfit. Is a job as lead quant in a small brokerage more likely to get me there than trying to work my way over from middle office?Anybody out there made this kind of transition (from a stable position in a large bank to a less secure but higher potential position in a small brokerage) and lived to tell the tale?Thanks in advance!

You're not too far into job hopping territory, but it does add to the risk of this move since if it doesn't work, could look a bit bad.The key decisive point is what exactly you will be doing. As it happened I've worked at a brokerage and a good point about them is that if you get a job at the desk you will get top gear experience in how your market works in practice.Indeed "practical" is a key driver in how they will evaluate you.Brokers are, shall we say "not quiet" people, and since we're talking in text I can't judege whether you'd like that at all.A downside is that you won't have much in the way of back up from other people in your specialisation.How big is the quant function there, my guess is quite small ?That can also be good, your disicpline will be that you have to be able to do a wider range of things.As for what it will look like in 2-3 years time, it could look good if you're getting practical experience in how to make money from quant work, but less good if it's much the same as your current role.

Thanks for the advice, Dominic.Up until now, they've been getting by without a quant on staff. I think the thought of hiring one has come from the realization that to maintain a competitive edge, they really need a mathematically-inclined person. So, up until now, the quant function has been effectively non-existent. As I understand it, they may want to start offering some more exotic structured products to their clients, which really necessitates having a full-time quant.I've got a friend who is a software developer in the brokerage (which is how I happened upon the as-yet-unposted opening) who has described the environment and the people in sufficient detail that I'm not terribly worried about getting bullied by aggressive brokers. I'm confident I can handle them. I'm young enough in my career that I think getting the in-depth market experience a brokerage can offer will have real benefit in the long term. Am I right in thinking this move is probably the better choice than sticking it out in M.O. from the point-of-view of eventually jumping into a front office role?

Migrations from MO to FO aren't the way to be,t but of course I don't know the details of your situation.I agree with their approach, given that you need to be adding more value in that game thes days.