QuoteThe one thing you do get from a PhD in math/hard science is the opportunity to build an amazing ability in logic and in solving problems. And hey, they let you keep this for the rest of your life, which in my opinion is priceless since you use this skill hundreds of times per day (you probably don’t even know it). Yes this is part of the fun of doing a PhD. Regardless of getting a quant job or not at the end of your studies you can always be satisfied that you somehow made it into the <1% of the worlds population on academic talent alone. Sure there will be others who are 10 times better than you and some 10 times worse, but in the end having a PhD in a scientific subject is still very rare globally IMO. Also you get to call yourself a doctor if nothing else. QuoteIn the US, the average starting salary is about 90K for PhDs in math.This is about the right level of an average PhD grad in the UK too. The average is around £40-45k. QuoteAfter all, most MBAs get paid more than PhDs This is what I thought, but from a salary site in the UK (IT sector) it seems that the average salary for PhD is around £50k, while MBA is around 63k. But if you look specifically in London, UK, you will find that the average salary of a PhD is actually around £65k, while an MBA is around £60k. This kind of makes sense as we would expect less science PhDs than MBAs in general, and due to the bias in quant roles in London you would expect the salary to be skewed slightly by PhD banking roles. links below:http://www.itjobswatch.co.uk/jobs/londo ... Ultimately having a PhD could be financially rewarding at the end, but don't go in assuming u will be earning £65K or more at the end.Stats Guy

QuoteOriginally posted by: ChicagoGuyIn the US, the average starting salary is about 90K for PhDs in math. Can you let us know where you got this number from? Many math Ph.D's I know are toiling in postdoc or adjunct positions where 90K is a hazy, distant dream; my experience is that only a small percentage of math Ph.D's go on to higher-paying jobs such as quant analysis and the like.

QuoteCan you let us know where you got this number from? Many math Ph.D's I know are toiling in postdoc or adjunct positions where 90K is a hazy, distant dream; my experience is that only a small percentage of math Ph.D's go on to higher-paying jobs such as quant analysis and the like. I guess I should have been more careful with the wording but here are the statistics:There are some surveys:http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Deg ... /SalaryThe US Department of Labor:http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes152021.htmThis is for 2006 and wages have prob. gone up. Oh yeah, when I said 90K, I meant for the industry, not academia. I should have said just average wage and not average starting wage.

QuoteOriginally posted by: imrantahir5403. There have been many posts which have stated that getting a PhD while being employed is not a healthy scenario due to the workload from both directionsit's not healthy because historically many (most) people who do this never finish (I'm talking about ABD folks who take a job and plan to finish their dissertation while working)

If you can do your first year PhD coursework part-time, you are not in a very ambitious program.If you think you can do the PhD research part-time, you are not doing very ambitious research.

Concerning the Carneggie Mellon PhD and PhD in maths vs PhD in Financial maths:Note that the CMU PhD is a PhD in Maths with an additional specialism in Financial Maths. That means you do the same coursework as the other PhDs in Maths, and then you do extra coursework in Financial Maths and you can write your dissertation on a topic related to Math Finance. It is longer than the PhD in Maths (approx 1 year extra). The dissertation will need to be as mathematically rigorous as if you were writing a dissertation in pure Maths.

Quoteit's not healthy because historically many (most) people who do this never finish (I'm talking about ABD folks who take a job and plan to finish their dissertation while working)True but if you can manage a part-time PhD with a full time job, and later go into a quant role it will seem like a holiday. Also if you had to work the occasional weekend at least you get paid well for it rather than working for very little pay with a PhD.Stats Guy

Hi,has anybody heard about the PhD programme of the "Frankfurt School of Finance and Management" - especially the quant-programme at the "Centre for Practical Quantitative Finance" (http://www.frankfurt-school.de/content/ ... nance.html) ? It sounds pretty good to me, the professors appear to be quite good, there are a lot of corporate cooperations and especially the opportunity of being able to make your PhD being an external PhD-student while being employed would be interesting (I am currently employed as a risk consultant). That leads me to a second more general question: Is a part time PhD per se considered to be less qualified than a fulltime programme (although if the scientific level is sufficiently high - I don't talk about these "quick-and-dirty"-one or two year business&Mgmt. doctorates some McKinsey-guys use to do) ? Well, I would say no because usually you spend 40% of your PhD-time for teaching and supporting your professors. Thus if you don't have to do that, are a bit better organised than the average student and willing to work 70 hour weeks than I assume the scientific standard won't suffer and your PhD will be as much acknowledged as a fulltime PhD (and in addition one has gathered practical working experiences, which should be an advantage, too, I guess).Markus

QuoteIs a part time PhD per se considered to be less qualified than a fulltime programme (although if the scientific level is sufficiently high - I don't talk about these "quick-and-dirty"-one or two year business&Mgmt. doctorates some McKinsey-guys use to do) ? A PhD is a PhD at the end of the day. Whether you do it part time, semi part time, full time etc.. the requirements are the same to be awarded a PhD, usually as significant original contribution to the research area being studied. IMO it's safer to do a part time PhD, since if it doesn’t work out at the end you haven't lost that much income in the 4/5 years you have been a student. You can finish a UK part-time PhD in around 5 years IMO if you are dedicated and work some weekends during the year. The ones that fail are usually the ones who were not committed, had a bad supervisor or got some attractive role before they finished the PhD, but *on average* having a PhD will take you further in the quant area than someone with an MFE.Yes, some full-time PhDs don't really work on their PhDs full time. Some help with teaching, marking etc. some doss for a few years in the clubs etc.. so a huge variation A few years ago when I started my part-time PhD I went through a lot of analysis trying to figure out if doing it full time was the best plan and quit my job as an analyst. But I figured that I would lose quite a lot of money if I did it full-time and no guarantee of a job at the end either, so I stuck with my current job and went with the part-time PhD for the last 3.5 years now. It has been tough I have to admit working weekend etc. but since I knew what area I wanted to research into I at least had some direction and a bit of a head start. I am in the last year now, and certainly the write-up is a tough task as well, but you just have to get on with it and keep the motivation going.Stats Guy

QuoteOriginally posted by: StatGuyTrue but if you can manage a part-time PhD with a full time job, and later go into a quant role it will seem like a holiday. Also if you had to work the occasional weekend at least you get paid well for it rather than working for very little pay with a PhD. It can work well if you get your boss to be supportive of your phd research. For example, maybe you could use your research work in your day job as part of your phd dissertation. For example, if your day job is to write analyst reports or computer code, the same report or code can be used as part of your dissertation. Then you can eat your cake and have it framed on the wall too.

Quote It can work well if you get your boss to be supportive of your phd research. For example, maybe you could use your research work in your day job as part of your phd dissertation. For example, if your day job is to write analyst reports or computer code, the same report or code can be used as part of your dissertation. Then you can eat your cake and have it framed on the wall too. It can work well if you get your boss to be supportive of your phd research. For example, maybe you could use your research work in your day job as part of your phd dissertation. For example, if your day job is to write analyst reports or computer code, the same report or code can be used as part of your dissertation. Then you can eat your cake and have it framed on the wall too.Yes this is true. When I started my PhD I was given support by my boss, and it was alined with some of the work I was doing there. But a year later I got offered a role in the finance services, so I took it up. They gave some allowance for the PhD, but I still pretty much work full-time there. Now my research is so divorced from what I do at work, so this is the worst case you could possibly be in. But I am confident I will finish - well ask me this time next year The problem with employers sponsoring your PhD is that you are in a way restricted in the direction you can take with the PhD, so it dosn't really give you much freedom to research what you want. It's can be a lonely time doing a part-time PhD since you never have the time to integrate yourself with other research students at uni and find when you are at uni you usually have a few hours with your tutor once a month and then you are left to do your own work for the next etc. During the bad time I do wonder why I am doing this. Stats Guy