I would like to apply the following top MFE programs in the world. I would like to rank among them. My final goal is to be a quantitative risk analyst or portfolio analyst.1. Warwick MSc Financial Mathematics 2. LSE MSc Risk and Stochastics3. ETH Zurich MAS in Finance4. Cornell Master of Financial Engineering5. Michigan university Ann Ar Bor Master of Financial Engineering. Please kindly provide some feedback. Great thanks.

Whilst these are certainly all top schools, why not Courant/Berkeley/MIT?

Well, they are top schools, but I think NYU, Berkeley are the next level .....By the way, what do you think about their ranking?Someone told me that the ranking should be...1. Cornell 2. LSE3. ETH4. Michigan5. Warwick......while someone told me that it should be...1. Cornell2. ETH3. Michigan4. LSE5. Warwick....

The Michigan program per my knowledge is not particularly strong in terms of employment opportunities upon graduation due to location.The Director of ETH Zurich had visited Baruch(CUNY) last year when I was a student. There was good feedback from his presentation and out of curiosity I had researched the program.... The syllabus looked solid and the price could not be beat. The issue is where do you plan to work... I would attend a US school to work in th US and a European school to work in Europe.

Well, I would like to work in Zurich. On the other hand, most of them also said that the top school in its own country could help you land a good job in the country saying ...Oxbridge, IC, LSE, Warwick in London, NYU, Berkeley, Columbia, Cornell, CMU in New York and ETH in Zurich or Europe as well. What's more, what do you think the overall ranking of ETH Zurich school? As according to the latest ranking of THES, it only ranks 42......but it ranked 10 in the year 2005.....Is that the research quality of ETH Zurich drops a little bit in recent years? Cos ETH Zurich should be ranked top 5-6 in Europe and top 20-30 in the world.....in my mind....If the placement rate of Michigan MFE is not so good, then I may not consider it in my application list.

You shouldn't bother with ranking.First there is no official ranking of MFE programs. Period.Second, the top program is not necessarily the best one for your personal goal/circumstances. Decide where/what you want to do after the degree and see which one provides the best path to your career goal.That assumes cost/location is the same when Michigan is not NYC and Zurich is not Lodon. 40K is not 80KAnd US H1B visa is not same as European work permit.

Well, but I can not believe that HKU can even ranked higher than ETH Zurich as according to THES 2007.............crazy...........

CDQN is right, and there is no widely accepted ranking for MFEs, though I suspect several call themselves "official".I wonder if P&D were to publish a list, quite how "official" it would be ?Would you really want to go to a school that a headhunter rated as rubbish ?No one does an MFE to make the world a better place it is a career move so a HH view is not without value.I would not have put Michigan 5th. Not a shabby school, but 5th in a very competitive global game ?But there are people who will look me in the eye and disagree.The THES "methodology" is no worse than many others I have seen, but I note the very low weighting given to the opinions of employers.I'd bet money that they asked no headhunters, and I know for a fact they didn't ask me.Personally I would be very surprised the data they got from "employers" was very useful, it would be a major job even for us, and we do this shit for a living.You ring up Goldmans or UBS, ask for an "employer view", you will get HR, and they can have a wildly divergent opinion from line managers in the bank.(who do you think hires Kings College CompSci grads ?)Fuck me if I can work out why Courant isn't up there, but if I was some witless arts graduate how would I know ?Work permits are both complex and simple.Complex because they change contantly and there is no consistency between EU states, but is simple because the only work permit you want it for London.We hear increasingly frequent tales of woe from those who the Creationists in the US Visa system has chosen to screw around.This is also simple because they are too stupid to be predictable, so it happens or not.

Well, but do you think ETH Zurich can be considered as a top school in Europe?

QuoteOriginally posted by: KennyMingWell, but do you think ETH Zurich can be considered as a top school in Europe?Depends on who you ask, the answer varies wildly

One of the many problems with the "top school" notion is that there are several factors.Firstly, a university can be great in one area, and abysmal in another, hence my barbed remarks about Kings College CS dept, and not categorising Reading as a university.People here only really care about its MFE programme, although most places draw upon other departments for courses and lecturers.There is also the fact that no two hiring managers will form a consensus on the list of "top schools".One thing that makes me treat the THES list with scorn is the treatment of French engineering schools which have earned a reputation for hardcore teaching.I have yet to form a hard opinion on ETH for MFE.Certainly it is not a bad place, and the alumni I've spoken to seem rather better than average, but it is not on my "top" list because of my own ignorance in detail about the course.This will be rectified and I am beginning to observe an important separating equilibrium in my own perception of masters providers.After the most important bit, which is the quality of what they teach which I care most about, there is the interface with employers and of course headhunters.Some masters programmes (Imperial, Courant, Baruch, Chicago etc) have sought us out and worked on selling their students.Indeed, we had only just started up business when Courant found us, and explained what their students had learned together with a file of the students looking for work.Some places are largely indifferent to us, and the rest want to charge us money to communicate to their students.This matters more now than it did then.Smart kids from good schools can expect to do well, but even in a good market, you still want as many options as possible.But in a slightly rougher market, this can make the difference between being a front office quant, and software development in model validation.

Quoteif I can work out why Courant isn't up there, Courant has housed some of the greats of mathematical physics such as Richard Courant, Peter Lax, Cathleen Synge Morawetz (daughter of J. L. Synge), KO Friedrichs and many more. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courant_In ... l_Sciences

But do you think I will have some advantages if I wanna apply job for European Banks like BNP, UBS, Credit Sussie, Deutsche bank from ETH MFE program?

I have yet to form a hard opinion on ETH for MFE.Certainly it is not a bad place, and the alumni I've spoken to seem rather better than average, but it is not on my "top" list because of my own ignorance in detail about the course.>> If ETH Advanced studies in Finance is not good enough, do you have any ideal school as your preferred list?>> Do you consider someone arms with 7city CQF + MSc in Stats/Maths/ComSc from a decent school is better than any decent MFE programs?>> I don't understand why the school charges you on getting their students to the job markets?

QuoteOriginally posted by: DCFCSome masters programmes (Imperial, Courant, Baruch, Chicago etc) have sought us out and worked on selling their students.It's wise of them to do some networking besides the usual banks contact. Places like Baruch will only work with HH that they can trust so they are not willing to expose their students to shady HH at any cost.QuoteOriginally posted by: DCFCSome places are largely indifferent to us, and the rest want to charge us money to communicate to their students.I guess they don't deal with HH at all or had a bad experience with HH and want them to pay dearly for it