Next year, I’ll be applying to both the Statistics and MFE programs at Columbia, and I need to know whether it’s worth the effort. My goal is to get into a quant role at a top trading institution. I’m also applying to Uchicago, Uberkeley and CMU. I need to verify a few things about the Columbia programs:1) Is it possible to do a degree in Statistics with a specialization in Financial Math at Columbia. I know there is a Math with specialization in finance option, but I would rather take the stats route. My understanding is that I’ll get more applied knowledge from the stats courses than from the math courses(which tend to be completely theoretical, and much less used in quant roles). This last point seems to contradict what I read on this forum, but this is what I heard from quant friends.2) How strong is the Statistics program at Columbia? Is this a top-20 statistics program? It doesn’t seem to even make the top-10 statistics list. If it isn’t top-10, will I be tossed out of the elite quant roles( seems like most quants come from top-3 programs)? Or does the Columbia brand-name help?3) How does the MFE at Columbia compare to other MFE programs? Rumor has it that it doesn’t help students how don’t already work on Wall Street. I’ve heard that its pointless to do the MFE program at Columbia if I’m not already in a qunat role.

do the CQF

By CQF, you mean the certificate in quantitative finance? I'm not sure that there is one at Columbia. I've heard of a certificate in financial engineering, but I don't know how reputable that is.

The CQF is the Wimott Certificate in Quantitative Finance: http://www.wilmott.com/cqf.cfm

yes, run by Dr Wilmott other established academics.It exempts you from 2 Risk management exams and is endorsed by the CFA institute. I think it is a really good course, designed at helping you become a practitioner in QF. teachers are as good (at the very least) or (most probably) better than what you will get at Colombia. They are certainly excellent communicators, something which in my undergraduate degree was sorely missing.

I have a hard time believing the Stat progam at Columbia isn't solid. If you have no experience and want to trade I would do the MFE but if you have experience it really doesn't matter which program you complete, do what interests you most. I don't know if the stat program at Columbia is considered to be applied or theoretical, but I would investigate that as well as if you can create your own program of study vs whether they have created a track for everyone. Also, some people seem to think that a stats route is "easier" but that is a misconception.

QuoteOriginally posted by: bostonquantI have a hard time believing the Stat progam at Columbia isn't solid. If you have no experience and want to trade I would do the MFE but if you have experience it really doesn't matter which program you complete, do what interests you most. I don't know if the stat program at Columbia is considered to be applied or theoretical, but I would investigate that as well as if you can create your own program of study vs whether they have created a track for everyone. Also, some people seem to think that a stats route is "easier" but that is a misconception.THanks to everyone who has posted.Bostonquant,Thanks for the reply. I like the stats program at Columbia and it looks solid to me, but I haven't seen any rankings that show it in the top-10. I know US News doesn't rank it in top-10, but who knows what methodology they use. I am qualified for math, stats and MFE grad programs....but I love stats more than the other two...thats why I'd like to go this route.

These certificate programs that people talk about might have credibility in London but in the US I've never even heard them mentioned. Osas, "rankings" for a stat program make little sense to me. UCLA has a list on their site from 1995 and there are some great programs that aren't even on that list. My understanding also is that "rankings" are more skewed towards theoretical than applied programs.http://www.stat.ucla.edu/program/ranking.phpStat programs generally aren't geared to people who work in finance they are geared towards people who either want to teach, work in industry, or at pharma companies. But anyone who "gets it" should easily be able to take the tools they teach you in regression, time series, etc and be able to apply them to financial markets.Being that Columbia as a university has a such a good name most people are going to assume their stat program is great. I would also think Columbia has advantages such as locality where you should be able to easily network with NY firms. If you look at that list Wisconsin has a great program (theoretical) but look at the location. Things to think about.

MFE at Columbia is good but pretty basic.The Math Finance there is very theoretical.Their Center for Applied Probability has had a good rep for manyyears. But if you want to get into a top tier bank you prob needa PhD.