Hi,For a first job (not an internship), do you think an associate market risk management on exotic products in a leading US investment bank is good if I want to go for a more trading/quant role?The job spec seems interesting as they require a strong PhD background for quantifying exotic models and implementation/validation.So it looks like a validation risk models role but it is in the "Finance" division and not "Securities" but I don't think it's really important.What do you think of this kind of job where you have a "large" view on risk models and not working directly for a desk on daily basis problems? Do you usually sit inside the trading room (but not on the desk)? cheers

typical back-office job. You'll be most likely sitting somewhere far-far away from trading floor talking to traders on the phone at best. All the quant stuff is most likely be restricted to using already developed market risk tools (xls spreadsheets)

Yay a back office role!!No seriously I don't think it is so poor in quantitative tasks. The guys in this team are all PhDs from leading US univ. How could they accept to do such a basic role? Why would they require someone with a math/physics PhD for the role?I know the kind of role you talk about but they usually are called "controllers" as far as I remember.

I think I know what kind of job (and maybe in particular the position) you refer to. I don't think it's a typical back office job either. It is middle office, but in a respectable IB where's there's most likely much to learn from skilled people.I think also that ronwise's comment is particularly stupid and probably coming from one who's no idea of what he's talking about. This FO stigma is meaningless nowadays.

DevonFangs, could you explain what particular "stupid" you found in my comment? I described the job as it is with no intention to disregard it at all.

Yes, maybe I was in a little bad mood - sorry for that.Even if it could be like you say, I don't think it's likely. And I also think that one could easily get at the first interview if it's like that (interviews are intended to provide the both of the parts with information).I work in the risk of a big bank (surely less prestigious than the one I presume VegaPlus is dealing with), but on the pricing side. Basically it is middle office, but as for the work it is more similar to a light-FO in which we have to re-develop models from scratch for model testing and stuff like that.We indeed sit far from the desk, and for this very reason I personally really would like to find something else closer to the mkt, but still the job isn't definitely back-office nor I'm not learning a lot from it.

Thanks for your prompt replies.Here is a general description of the division. http://www2.goldmansachs.com/careers/ou ... lysis.html and more precisely on this team:QuoteDerivatives Analysis consists of derivatives modeling experts focused on the risk management of exotic derivatives. The group assesses and quantifies model risk, approves all pricing models and advises senior management on the risks associated with particularly large and complex transactions.It doesn't look uninteresting at all. It can't be a "bad" role for a first job. But what about moving to a "real" quant role?

Is it right to say that FO quants develop new models from scratch while Risk Management quants just re-use existing models? I'm a bit confused here because I thought FO quants have a tight work schedule and most of their time is spent on implementing existing models efficiently, while RM quants have a luxury of time to consider different types of models.

FO quants work to manage the risk on a daily basis and have a "real-time work". RMs (in some job spec, they are called "quantitative risk analyst") look more on the models used by the FO and try to find their limits and the global firm exposure to these models. So I would differentiate:- FO quant: working directly for traders, give them tools/models to manage the real-time risks- Research quant: working on new models, doing typically a research work- Risk quant: independant teams that have to double-check the models currently implemented in FO pricers and advise the firm's management about the current risks.

You are not disagreeing with my understanding. It sounds that FO quants play more like an operational or support role to the traders, whereas RM quants have the freedom of doing independent analysis. Either way, both FO and RM quants don't really develop models from scratch.

There is a big difference between market risk quants and market risk managers! The last ones (that is what the original post is about as I assume) dont do any models and dont test/check them at all - that is the job of model validation guys. The market risk quants do the models for market risk managers, the model validation team tests those models (it could either be the same FO model validation team or risk management validation team) and risk managers simply use them. That is it. On positive side the market risk managers certainly know more on products behaviour which is kind of more relevant to trading jobs IMHO.

Exactly. You can't develop a new model every day. And in the FO, you have to assist traders on their daily needs. I think most of FO quants do programming, update pricers, etc. At GS for example, they don't call them "FO quant" but "desk strats", they do many different tasks for the trading desk.Actually quant risk analyst (RM) is more a "validation model quant". The top management needs to have an independant team, not directly linked to the FO, to check if the models used are relevant and not too risky. That's the reason why there are risk/model validation quants.So my initial question was if one can easily move from risk quant to a FO quant.

Have just seen ronwise's last post. The thing is that the job spec about the role says the team has also to make models validations. It's kind of weird, maybe it depends on the bank.