goldfish, you miss the point. firms hire elite grads because the elite grads are BETTER/smarter/prettier on average than the state school grads.As someone who does this shit professionally, (or if not actually professionally I at least do it for money), and have to explain again that the issue is often that of variance reduction.Although the best from two differently ranked universities may be harder to separate, the number of dimwits tends to be lower, reducing the number that managers need to interview.You can of course see at least one problem here since the source with the higher variance implies may well have the better candidates, but the issue is the cost of finding them.

QuoteOriginally posted by: deepvalue goldfish, you miss the point. firms hire elite grads because the elite grads are BETTER/smarter/prettier on average than the state school grads.No way. Winnie Cooper went to UCLA and she pushes the average of good-looking quants from state schools to the extreme

I got many questions, but gave few answers."Don't harvard Cbio labs have about a dozen postdocs? It's easy to get lost in the hordes even while your boss works you to death."I would be the only postdoc at this professor, it is a small group."Do you want to live in the US, or in your home country?"This is something I am not certain about. It depends on the prospects I will have in the US. After spending some time here I might find it hardto feel comfortable in my home country.My advisor is not a Nobel winner, still very well known though. I benefited tremendously from his guidance.I absolutely agree with the point that any degree form Harvard is more valuable than a PostDoc. Getting into grad school is an open competition, while in a PostDocapplication connections have more substantial weight.I have never been obsessed with Ivy league schools, I certainly would not like to get a physics PhD from Brown or Dartmouth, as I am currently at a much stronger graduateprogram. I did not chose my school based on undergraduate reputation. Neither would I go to UPenn or John Hopkins, because they are not particularly good in the subfield I am interested in.I disagree with the assumption that everyone picks graduate schools based on overall reputation. I know several examples, where smart people joined a program because of a famous advisor.PhD is supposed to be about research, everyone should be judged based on this criterion.

I don't want to discourage you. You are in pretty good shape. You have a postdoc at Harvard in computational biology - a hot field. You can spend the next few years doing your postdoc immune to the volatility in finance. At the end of your postdoc, the financial crisis may have receded, and you may have options both in finance and academia. But don't assume a postdoc at Harvard will mean that Goldman, JP Morgan, DE Shaw, etc. will all beg you to come work for them. You will be competing with people who have PhDs from top physics departments (Caltech, MIT, Harvard, Stanford, Princeton, Berkley, Cornell, etc.). During your postdoc, make sure to develop as much as possible skills relevant to finance. Sit in on courses in business and finance, master C++, master Hull, etc. Find ways to distinguish yourself. Do not be idle, and you should do well.Good luck.P.S. 1 It may be true that some choose their PhDs based on the advisor. However, examples of people turning down MIT to do a PhD at the University of Kansas because of an advisor are rare. At the postdoc level, such examples are much more common. P.S. 2 If you are foreigner in need of h-1b sponsorship, you need to think very carefully about the anti-h1-b amendment in the recent stimulus bill. While the full effects are still being debated, it may severely limit your options in finance over the next two years. Basically, many of the larger banks may not be able to hire h1-bs (most foreign workers). For example, seehttp://www.thestandard.com/news/2009/02/06/sen ... Originally posted by: ChaoticI got many questions, but gave few answers."Don't harvard Cbio labs have about a dozen postdocs? It's easy to get lost in the hordes even while your boss works you to death."I would be the only postdoc at this professor, it is a small group."Do you want to live in the US, or in your home country?"This is something I am not certain about. It depends on the prospects I will have in the US. After spending some time here I might find it hardto feel comfortable in my home country.My advisor is not a Nobel winner, still very well known though. I benefited tremendously from his guidance.I absolutely agree with the point that any degree form Harvard is more valuable than a PostDoc. Getting into grad school is an open competition, while in a PostDocapplication connections have more substantial weight.I have never been obsessed with Ivy league schools, I certainly would not like to get a physics PhD from Brown or Dartmouth, as I am currently at a much stronger graduateprogram. I did not chose my school based on undergraduate reputation. Neither would I go to UPenn or John Hopkins, because they are not particularly good in the subfield I am interested in.I disagree with the assumption that everyone picks graduate schools based on overall reputation. I know several examples, where smart people joined a program because of a famous advisor.PhD is supposed to be about research, everyone should be judged based on this criterion.

QuoteOriginally posted by: deepvaluegoldfish, you miss the point. firms hire elite grads because the elite grads are BETTER/smarter/prettier on average than the state school grads.For physics Ph.D.'s they aren't. For undergraduates, the difference isn't huge. Also it's not that elite universities are better on the average, it's just that the number of people that are totally incompetent are smaller since the applicants have been vetted, and the elite universities have good salesmen.QuoteThere's a reason why somebody got into Ivy's PhD program and why somebody else has to go to a southern state school, hee hee.Which is what exactly? In my case the basic reason that I didn't get into Harvard was that I spent lots of time reading C++, philosophy and social science, and got B's in my courses rather than A's. Really burned me at the time, but looking back, it was a hugely good decision.QuoteAll things equal, don't under-estimate the person with a demonstrated record of superb achievement as evidenced by elite schooling starting from first grade up to phd. At the very least, such a person is a hard, steady worker with all the traits of a good employee. Not really. One of my good traits is that I've failed and bounced back. Someone that has never failed and in fact deathly afraid of failure has some maladaptive personality traits. The other thing is that someone that has gotten where they are by passing tests and pleasing authority runs into problems when they end up in unstructured environments in which authority is wrong and there are no clear tests. One thing that is amazing is the number of entrepreneurs that are elite-school dropouts. That gets you both worlds in which you have someone that has been "vetted" but really hated the maladaptive parts of elite schools.

QuoteOriginally posted by: musterseedBut don't assume a postdoc at Harvard will mean that Goldman, JP Morgan, DE Shaw, etc. will all beg you to come work for them.Goldman, JPMorgan and DE Shaw could all care less where you got your Ph.D. What matters is to do quality work and quality research and to push yourself as hard as you can. Getting a Harvard post-doc or Ph.D. means nothing. Taking advantage of being at Harvard to push yourself as far as you can go means everything.QuoteDuring your postdoc, make sure to develop as much as possible skills relevant to finance.But be careful here. It turns out that a lot of people try to be more relevant to finance, and then turn out doing things that are less relevant to finance. What you want to do is to learn enough finance so that you can see how you can apply your research to finance. The thing here is that you aren't going to read in a book how Comp Bio is going to help finance. It's up to you to figure that out and then make that case to the interviewer.Something that has worked for me is to just study whatever I find "fun." QuoteP.S. 1 It may be true that some choose their PhDs based on the advisor. However, examples of people turning down MIT to do a PhD at the University of Kansas because of an advisor are rare. At the postdoc level, such examples are much more common.It is, because you usually don't choose advisors until after second year. However, it is reasonable common to choose little name versus big name for topic. Also, the small niche universities are also extremely competitive. IIRC the admissions rate for University of Arizona astrophysics is quite a bit lower than for Harvard.

I would also add that some managers on Wall St and HR in particular have hang ups about hiring from public schools. It's like, if it's public, it must be bad. In some contexts, an undergrad from UCBerkeley is viewed as worse than say Notre Dame or Colgate university, which from an academic stanpoint is totally absurd. QuoteOriginally posted by: twofishQuoteOriginally posted by: deepvaluegoldfish, you miss the point. firms hire elite grads because the elite grads are BETTER/smarter/prettier on average than the state school grads.For physics Ph.D.'s they aren't. For undergraduates, the difference isn't huge. Also it's not that elite universities are better on the average, it's just that the number of people that are totally incompetent are smaller since the applicants have been vetted, and the elite universities have good salesmen.QuoteThere's a reason why somebody got into Ivy's PhD program and why somebody else has to go to a southern state school, hee hee.Which is what exactly? In my case the basic reason that I didn't get into Harvard was that I spent lots of time reading C++, philosophy and social science, and got B's in my courses rather than A's. Really burned me at the time, but looking back, it was a hugely good decision.QuoteAll things equal, don't under-estimate the person with a demonstrated record of superb achievement as evidenced by elite schooling starting from first grade up to phd. At the very least, such a person is a hard, steady worker with all the traits of a good employee. Not really. One of my good traits is that I've failed and bounced back. Someone that has never failed and in fact deathly afraid of failure has some maladaptive personality traits. The other thing is that someone that has gotten where they are by passing tests and pleasing authority runs into problems when they end up in unstructured environments in which authority is wrong and there are no clear tests. One thing that is amazing is the number of entrepreneurs that are elite-school dropouts. That gets you both worlds in which you have someone that has been "vetted" but really hated the maladaptive parts of elite schools.

Nomade: what impression do these managers have of European degrees?

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. In my experience, many banks care very much where you got your PhD and BSc. In my shop, ~75% of the people I know have either a PhD or a BSc from an elite institution. I doubt this is by chance.Anyways, one important piece of advice I can give to Chaotic is to think very carefully about the anti-h1B amendment in the stimulus bill. If Chaotic is a foreigner requiring h1b sponsorship, then this ammendment could profoundly affect his chances of securing a job with a major bank in the U.S. in the next two years. In other words, he may want to take the job with the bank abroad. QuoteOriginally posted by: twofishQuoteOriginally posted by: musterseedBut don't assume a postdoc at Harvard will mean that Goldman, JP Morgan, DE Shaw, etc. will all beg you to come work for them.Goldman, JPMorgan and DE Shaw could all care less where you got your Ph.D. What matters is to do quality work and quality research and to push yourself as hard as you can. Getting a Harvard post-doc or Ph.D. means nothing. Taking advantage of being at Harvard to push yourself as far as you can go means everything.QuoteDuring your postdoc, make sure to develop as much as possible skills relevant to finance.But be careful here. It turns out that a lot of people try to be more relevant to finance, and then turn out doing things that are less relevant to finance. What you want to do is to learn enough finance so that you can see how you can apply your research to finance. The thing here is that you aren't going to read in a book how Comp Bio is going to help finance. It's up to you to figure that out and then make that case to the interviewer.Something that has worked for me is to just study whatever I find "fun." QuoteP.S. 1 It may be true that some choose their PhDs based on the advisor. However, examples of people turning down MIT to do a PhD at the University of Kansas because of an advisor are rare. At the postdoc level, such examples are much more common.It is, because you usually don't choose advisors until after second year. However, it is reasonable common to choose little name versus big name for topic. Also, the small niche universities are also extremely competitive. IIRC the admissions rate for University of Arizona astrophysics is quite a bit lower than for Harvard.

QuoteOriginally posted by: musterseedI guess we will have to agree to disagree. In my experience, many banks care very much where you got your PhD and BSc. In my shop, ~75% of the people I know have either a PhD or a BSc from an elite institution. I doubt this is by chance.At my shop, I really don't know what fraction of people have a Ph.D. or BSc from an elite institution since the topic never really comes up. I wouldn't be surprised if there is a strong tendency toward elite institutions, but that is because it's where campus recruiting events occur, but if they have a get together at MIT, and someone from Roxbury Community College shows up, they aren't going to get kicked out. The other thing is that people from elite institutions tend to have high opinions of themselves, this is not a small thing.Anyway, the fact that different banks *do* end up doing different things is very significant. (Incidentally, if anyone wants to know how I know what I think I know, feel free to PM me.)