Hi I come from a financial mathematics Masters (KCL). I basically have three questions :1) Whether I should go for CQF or a research phD (both at Imperial)?2) What are your thoughts on a phD in statistical finance?3) I had gone straight from an undergrad to a masters and am now thinking to get into a phD. Is my lack of experience going to be seen as negative or do you think I should get a couple of years of experience under my belt before getting into the phD?Thanks!

It really depends on what you want to do. If you go straight to PhD it will probably take you 3-4 years full time. Depending on your age, you will still be young when it comes to knock a door in a bank.A PhD is an indepth study of a particular subject. You learn a lot in depth.However, if you went to work right now, you won't miss 4 years of working experience and you will learn a great deal of things from practice. If you feel that you already have the necessary tools to succeed in the professional world, my recommendation is to look for a job now.If you want to pursue a PhD because you want to learn more, go for this instead...but be prepared to compromise financially for the next 3-4 years. money will come later.

I agree with mdrand, and would also get you to ask yourself an extra question.Are you really interested in some particular topic for the Phd ? Its tough doing it if you are seeing it merely as a qualification.Stat fin sounds good for getting a job, but make sure in your own mind that this is a happy accident not your main motivation.

QuoteOriginally posted by: DCFCI agree with mdrand, and would also get you to ask yourself an extra question.Are you really interested in some particular topic for the Phd ? Its tough doing it if you are seeing it merely as a qualification.Stat fin sounds good for getting a job, but make sure in your own mind that this is a happy accident not your main motivation.I agree completely with DCFC! PhD is not just another title, it's much more than that. Also, I'd like to add something to what mdrand said about learning in depth... Getting a PhD is not just learning something "in depth". It also about coming up with your own ideas, proving a new theorem, exploring a new approach. I got my PhD not just for the title, but because I wanted to learn some speacific things in math, I wanted to prove my own theorems and have them published. I never hesitated wheather I should go for a PhD or not. I had a clear understanding after completing my BS that I wanted to continue on a PhD program. In other words, what I'm trying to say is, if you have to ask, don't go for a PhD. It's not for you. No offense.PS what happened to those times when people weere coming into quant finance from topology, algebra and otehr pure maths? I understand that the world has changed and it is a necessaty now to have people trained before they come on the job, but all those MFEs and othe crap is a bit overkill in my opinion. Banks will loose inthe long run because of hiring ms-finance trained monkeys

Hi,I have completed the CQF last June 2006. It is a sound training, but 6 months evening is definitely too short to cover all what the quant world can offer you. For my personal taste & professional use, it was too much concentrated on option pricing, very too much...actually it would be better called "Certificate in option pricer" ...no I exagerate a bit, but this is normal in six months...Now it helped me greatly to have insights about what is possible in Quantitative finance, a good entry point in the Quantitative finance community in London (though I am not located in London)...I believe it is certainly worth the effort (no social life for six months if you are not well advanced in maths & stochastic calculus), but I do not believe it is worth the price...something you do if your company pays for it (my case)I have a question for you folks: What do you think about part time PhD?? do you know any good university allowing for part time PhD? When I google it I find diverse & opposite opinion about this... I am greatly interested by defining/finding an automatic investment (investment, not trading in the sense of optimal trade execution...) quantitative scheme in the Fund of fund (of fund of hedge fund) context, most probably using AI programming (I do not know this field yet)=> But I do not have the time or the resource to stop working for 3 years & do not want to wait 5 years to be with an employer for him to support this research (I want to be my own boss at the end) FYI I am currently in the CFA program (awaiting 2nd level results) >> My purpose as mentioned is to start by Quantitative software provider company in the above context, probably more in Europe where it only starts to get attention & eventually if mother nature likes me move forward to establish a quantitative investment boutique...but this is really not anywhere near future =//Every intelligent comment welcome, specifically on part-time PhDMany thanks

How useful did you find the CQF alumni networking to be? How well did the distance learning work for you?

If you want to be an academic, OR if there is some specific thing you REALLY want to explore in depth, do PhD. If you want to maximize your expected salary in 6 years' time (and even more so for shorter time spans), do CQF and get a job.

Very reasonable and true advice.However when I check the "job boards".. the description of "skills" an ideal average candidate must possess in order only to apply are appalling...basically you have to have at least one PHD be young (and beautiful) under 30, speak all possible languages including the "Greek language", program like a God, but also be a top-probabilist, and know all the financial "jargon bargon"... there might be a point of having a PHD just to past the entry barriers... like for the HSMP... if you have supe good levels but have not been in UK or/& to an US MBA and have not earned a top salary the year prior to the taking of the test- then your value is under average... so actually you may here also implicitely be measuring... how "shrewd" you are in securing a good job.. but then you might not really need to go through HSMP-- you could get a position just normally no?

LOL

I106402, you have a PM.

QuoteOriginally posted by: I106402Hi,I have completed the CQF last June 2006. It is a sound training, but 6 months evening is definitely too short to cover all what the quant world can offer you. For my personal taste & professional use, it was too much concentrated on option pricing, very too much...actually it would be better called "Certificate in option pricer" ...no I exagerate a bit, but this is normal in six months...Now it helped me greatly to have insights about what is possible in Quantitative finance, a good entry point in the Quantitative finance community in London (though I am not located in London)...I believe it is certainly worth the effort (no social life for six months if you are not well advanced in maths & stochastic calculus), but I do not believe it is worth the price...something you do if your company pays for it (my case)I have a question for you folks: What do you think about part time PhD?? do you know any good university allowing for part time PhD? When I google it I find diverse & opposite opinion about this... I am greatly interested by defining/finding an automatic investment (investment, not trading in the sense of optimal trade execution...) quantitative scheme in the Fund of fund (of fund of hedge fund) context, most probably using AI programming (I do not know this field yet)=> But I do not have the time or the resource to stop working for 3 years & do not want to wait 5 years to be with an employer for him to support this research (I want to be my own boss at the end) FYI I am currently in the CFA program (awaiting 2nd level results) >> My purpose as mentioned is to start by Quantitative software provider company in the above context, probably more in Europe where it only starts to get attention & eventually if mother nature likes me move forward to establish a quantitative investment boutique...but this is really not anywhere near future =//Every intelligent comment welcome, specifically on part-time PhDMany thanks1)Regarding P/T PhD, there are some....but there are some conditions:Your team had some relationship with some big name at academia(normally, the head/director was the student of this Big name), then you can do a real-case PhD, P/T, by supervised this big name. Quite few examples...Cambridge - BoA/CITI; Carnegie Mellon - GS/LM....2)Regarding the Algo TradingYou missed a very good conference on Programme Trading(Algorithmic Trading) conference which organised by CARISMA last week

Yes, it was a good conference, did we meet ?

Of course we did and it was very nice talking to you. (I'll PM you)Also to hateeque,Although you had MSc. Fin Math I do not know why you are thinking to cont MSc at CQF @ IC, I mean King's Msc is famous for their math ability....which is far far better then where you plan to go. If you mean the professional qualification CQF, then it is different...

1) about P/T PhD: that will I guess by my issue...nevertheless, apart from the intellectual point of view having PhD is also a "selling" argument (sure some academic on this forum will have a hart attack ...which will be important for my personal project...show you've done something by yourself, isn't? 2) I was at this conference...That's why this topic is refreshed in my silly brain =O, where you there?? may be we met...

QuoteOriginally posted by: ZmeiGorynychIf you want to be an academic, OR if there is some specific thing you REALLY want to explore in depth, do PhD. If you want to maximize your expected salary in 6 years' time (and even more so for shorter time spans), do CQF and get a job.Certainly not an academic...& I already have the CQF & a job...& 6 years time is quite long I find...by then I would like to have my own business...so entering the market with this additional qualification (which is much more something you create under supervision...not some already-made knowledge that is provided to you) I believe would be a big plus...don't you think?