Mathematics vs Maths and Economics? Trinity

sdiff · 31-08-2011 5:15pm #1

I'm interested in finance and economics but also mathematics. I'd love to get a job that involves applying mathematical methods to finance, f.e a "quant", an actuary, a trader, etc. Basically I'd like to keep my options open while doing as much maths as possible.
So which would be better? Would I be sufficiently challenged with the maths and economics? I know I could choose to do math major/economics minor if it turned out I didn't like economics as much as maths.
Take into account that I'm not really interested in the physics side of mathematics.

later12 · 31-08-2011 6:12pm

I work in quantitative finance myself so hopefully might be able to help you with some issues.

I did Economics & Mathematics in University. In retrospect, the economics aspect of my education, although very interesting and well taught, was ultimately useless in securing a job. Investment banks are generally only ever interested in quant skills, they don't particularly care about economics.

I did a Masters in Mathematical Finance, and you'll generally find that a strongly quantitative Masters degree is very desirable on top of your strongly quantitative undergraduate degree.

People I work with and have worked with are more likely to have studied statistics or mathematics than economics.

All things being equal, and if you want to work as a trader/quant, and you have no inherent attraction to economics by now, then I would say you should stick to pure maths.

sdiff · 31-08-2011 6:37pm

later10 wrote: »

I work in quantitative finance myself so hopefully might be able to help you with some issues.

I did Economics & Mathematics in University. In retrospect, the economics aspect of my education, although very interesting and well taught, was ultimately useless in securing a job. Investment banks are generally only ever interested in quant skills, they don't particularly care about economics.

I did a Masters in Mathematical Finance, and you'll generally find that a strongly quantitative Masters degree is very desirable on top of your strongly quantitative undergraduate degree.

People I work with and have worked with are more likely to have studied statistics or mathematics than economics.

All things being equal, and if you want to work as a trader/quant, and you have no inherent attraction to economics by now, then I would say you should stick to pure maths.

Thanks for the post, very useful! But I've looked at the course in trinity and noticed that alot of the economic course is relevant to finance and is quite mathematical. I could fill up my 3rd/4th years with stuff like Investment Analysis, Econometrics, Economics of Financial Markets etc.... I could ignore stuff to do with standard economics and take up more quantitative/financial courses.
Do you think maths on it's own would be more useful even than these?
Edit: To answer your last question, I do have an interest in economics (and current affairs/politics) But it doesn't live up to my interest in maths or the alluring career of a "quant"

later12 · 31-08-2011 7:15pm

You could certainly make good use of the quant aspects of the Trinity course, but whether or not that will be recognised by employers leafing through CVs is another thing.

There is a danger that they just see 'economics & maths' and immediately form the opinion that your economics education has stunted your development in mathematics.

I know that after my UG degree, I'd go along for interviews and prospective employers would openly mention a concern about my quant skills based on my degree type, and even though I liked econometrics, the overall mathematical element of my course was nowhere near as intensive as candidates with pure maths backgrounds or candidates with degrees in physics. So I did various jobs before my Masters, but none of them were in banking or finance.

And that was at the height of the financial boom, if anything IBs have become even more selective and positions are even more competitive.

I'd say Economics & Maths is a great degree, and lots of people in Investment Banking have it, and it works great. But I don't think it gives you the competitive edge that a stronger quant degree like pure maths or physics can give.

On the other hand, you can easily enough, of course, convince prospective employers of your mathematical faculties by doing a strongly quantitative postgraduate degree (a postgrad will probably be necessary in any event) so this may only be of limited importance. It's true that having an economics aspect to your degree can inject some well needed variety into your studies, while possibly adding some real world meaning to what you're doing with maths.

sdiff · 31-08-2011 7:19pm

later10 wrote: »

You could certainly make good use of the quant aspects of the Trinity course, but whether or not that will be recognised by employers leafing through CVs is another thing.

There is a danger that they just see 'economics & maths' and immediately form the opinion that your economics education has stunted your development in mathematics.

I know that after my UG degree, I'd go along for interviews and prospective employers would openly mention a concern about my quant skills based on my degree type, and even though I liked econometrics, the overall mathematical element of my course was nowhere near as intensive as candidates with pure maths backgrounds or candidates with degrees in physics. So I did various jobs before my Masters, but none of them were in banking or finance.

And that was at the height of the financial boom, if anything IBs have become even more selective and positions are even more competitive.

I'd say Economics & Maths is a great degree, and lots of people in Investment Banking have it, and it works great. But I don't think it gives you the competitive edge that a stronger quant degree like pure maths or physics can give.

On the other hand, you can easily enough, of course, convince prospective employers of your mathematical faculties by doing a strongly quantitative postgraduate degree (a postgrad will probably be necessary in any event) so this may only be of limited importance. It's true that having an economics aspect to your degree can inject some well needed variety into your studies, while possibly adding some real world meaning to what you're doing with maths.

I see. You raise some good points there. Basically I chose between
-Econometrics
-Investment Analysis
-Economics of Financial Markets
-Quantitative Method
OR
-Extra maths.

Hmm.. Decisions decisions

Fremen · 31-08-2011 9:36pm

In my experience, investment banks don't care too much about economics for quant work. There are other areas of investment banking where that kind of thing is important, but it's not that relevant in the hardcore stochastic analysis/probabilistic modelling parts.

They'd be more on the lookout for good programming skills. They like C++ programmers.

One decent route is to do a pure maths degree focusing on analysis and stats, followed by part III at cambridge focusing on stochastic analysis. I've met two people who did that, and they both got banking jobs fairly easily. Of course, they were both very freaking smart, which also helps.

Take a look at the careers forum on Wilmott.com. Some posters there are pretty obnoxious, but others give really good advice.

Edit: Rule of thumb - it's easier to move from purer disciplines to more applied disciplines than the reverse. This is a recurring theme in the "pure maths as a degree" thread.

LeixlipRed · 31-08-2011 9:39pm

Fremen wrote: »

One decent route is to do a pure maths degree focusing on analysis and stats, followed by part III at cambridge focusing on stochastic analysis.

Jaysis, you make it sound so easy. Part III is tough, for the best of the best. I know I couldn't do it and I know a lad who dropped out of it this year. If you have the talent it's the only masters in this part of the world you should be doing though.

Fremen · 31-08-2011 11:50pm

LeixlipRed wrote: »

Fremen wrote: »

One decent route is to do a pure maths degree focusing on analysis and stats, followed by part III at cambridge focusing on stochastic analysis.

Jaysis, you make it sound so easy. Part III is tough, for the best of the best. I know I couldn't do it and I know a lad who dropped out of it this year. If you have the talent it's the only masters in this part of the world you should be doing though.

The thing is, if you want a good quant job, you either need to be of that standard or you need to be lucky. Preferably both.

Remember, if you're going for front-office quant jobs, these are the guys you're competing with. I interviewed with Goldman Sachs for a graduate job at one point. There were about eight other guys interviewing at the same time. Most were Oxford or Cambridge maths (though I'm not sure if they were undergrads or postgrads).

LeixlipRed · 31-08-2011 11:59pm

That not a slight exageration? What do you define as good? Pretty much all quants jobs pay over the industrial average surely? I know a few people who went into quants, earning good money and were nowhere near Part III standard. Smart guys but not talented enough to flourish on a course like that.

Fremen · 01-09-2011 12:27am

LeixlipRed wrote: »

That not a slight exageration? What do you define as good? Pretty much all quants jobs pay over the industrial average surely? I know a few people who went into quants, earning good money and were nowhere near Part III standard. Smart guys but not talented enough to flourish on a course like that.

I did say you could get lucky too.

It depends what you mean by quant, I guess. There would be very few of the kind of jobs I'm thinking of going in Ireland. When I said front-desk quant, I meant (for example) the guy the traders talk to when they need to sell some tailor-made financial instrument to a client and they need a rough idea of what they should charge.

Irish jobs with a quant element at places like susquehanna are more y do with market-making - the technical challenge there is to hedge away any risk you're taking on for the company. That isn't easy, but it's not as tough.

LeixlipRed · 01-09-2011 12:35am

Fair enough, don't really know much about it or care for that sort of career. Was just curious.

Fremen · 01-09-2011 12:48am

LeixlipRed wrote: »

Fair enough, don't really know much about it or care for that sort of career. Was just curious.

I was mad into the idea for a while, though eventually I decided it wasn't for me. I might have a different attitude if I had done a bit better in the interviews!

LeixlipRed · 01-09-2011 11:01am

The idea of speculating with other people's money is slightly disturbing to me. A job is a job though, but I couldn't work in that environment even if I was good enough.

later12 · 02-09-2011 2:20am

Fremen wrote: »

Most were Oxford or Cambridge maths (though I'm not sure if they were undergrads or postgrads).

In fairness I don't think anyone would put Oxford and Cambridge in the same league. Would you even raise an eyebrow at an LSE, Cambridge or Imperial graduate being chosen over an Oxford graduate? I wouldn't.

sdiff · 02-09-2011 8:56am

later10 wrote: »

In fairness I don't think anyone would put Oxford and Cambridge in the same league. Would you even raise an eyebrow at an LSE, Cambridge or Imperial graduate being chosen over an Oxford graduate? I wouldn't.

They say Cambridge is better for Maths and Science while Oxford is better at humanities.

Call Me Lia · 13-09-2011 11:19pm

Interesting thread. I'm exactly the same as the OP in terms of what kind of jobs I want. I also hope to study maths + economics or even just maths on its own, as I'd love to develop my thinking, and obviously for the huge no. of career options afterwards. But I am terrified that I won't be good enough to study maths as a degree. I do consider myself relatively strong at it, and as of now it has been a subject that I don't study for and yet still get A's the majority of the time. But is that enough? College level maths would obviously be muuuch harder than that of the Leaving Cert, and I'm guessing to become a quant one would need to get very good grades in university. What I am trying to say is that are there any ways to assess, now that I'm in 6th year, whether I would cope with studying maths at 3rd level?

sdiff · 14-09-2011 5:47pm

Call Me Lia wrote: »

Interesting thread. I'm exactly the same as the OP in terms of what kind of jobs I want. I also hope to study maths + economics or even just maths on its own, as I'd love to develop my thinking, and obviously for the huge no. of career options afterwards. But I am terrified that I won't be good enough to study maths as a degree. I do consider myself relatively strong at it, and as of now it has been a subject that I don't study for and yet still get A's the majority of the time. But is that enough? College level maths would obviously be muuuch harder than that of the Leaving Cert, and I'm guessing to become a quant one would need to get very good grades in university. What I am trying to say is that are there any ways to assess, now that I'm in 6th year, whether I would cope with studying maths at 3rd level?

Take a look at extra maths. STEP papers, a few uni topics. See how you do.
I've personally decided that I'm going to just do maths now. Can still take stoch. analysis and other math-economical stuff.

Call Me Lia · 15-09-2011 4:51pm

sdiff wrote: »

Take a look at extra maths. STEP papers, a few uni topics. See how you do.
I've personally decided that I'm going to just do maths now. Can still take stoch. analysis and other math-economical stuff.

Thanks, I'll try some of them. You're doing just maths now? I think I'll wait until that maths/ physics open day in trinity and see how I get on there

sdiff · 15-09-2011 5:18pm

Call Me Lia wrote: »

Thanks, I'll try some of them. You're doing just maths now? I think I'll wait until that maths/ physics open day in trinity and see how I get on there

Indeed. I've figured everything else is merely applied maths so why do anything but maths :P

SonaRings · 08-11-2018 10:15am

I studied pure maths in Trinity and went on to become a trader. I used to interview potential candidates so can offer some insight.

First of all, when I was applying for trading rolls I found that the investment banks in London valued economic knowledge more than the prop firms in Dublin do. There aren't many trading companies in Dublin to choose from that have front office jobs, really just sig and citadel. Therefore having knowledge of economics might give you a better chance of getting a job at one of the big investment banks in London.

This extra knowledge of economics is pretty irrelevant when interviewing for the Dublin firms and as mentioned already, may take away from the knowledge you could have in maths.

Something that is becoming increasingly important is knowledge of python. Trading is getting more and more competitive so being able to do data analysis with python is vital. You can learn this once you start in the company but the pace is so intense that having this already would take a bit of pressure off.

I suppose it comes down to where you'd like to get a job. You will still get interviews in these places with either degree but from my experience you need a bit of economics for London and none at all for Dublin.

Iscreamkone · 24-06-2020 1:41pm

Slightly off thread but does anyone have an opinion on the MSc Quantitative Finance from UCD. Is it a good course with good prospects?
They allow engineers entry. How would prospective employers look on an undergrad engineering degree plus the MSc QF?

[Deleted User] · 25-07-2020 10:07am

Iscreamkone wrote: »

Slightly off thread but does anyone have an opinion on the MSc Quantitative Finance from UCD. Is it a good course with good prospects?
They allow engineers entry. How would prospective employers look on an undergrad engineering degree plus the MSc QF?

Your engineering degree won't be an issue. I haven't seen the course structure but they must teach the fundamentals – risk measurement, finance theory and products etc – from scratch because I know others have gone there from physics, and economics. Do you have a specific plan for where you'd like it to take you?

Iscreamkone · 26-07-2020 2:54pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Your engineering degree won't be an issue. I haven't seen the course structure but they must teach the fundamentals – risk measurement, finance theory and products etc – from scratch because I know others have gone there from physics, and economics. Do you have a specific plan for where you'd like it to take you?

When applying for positions would employers regard engineering undergrad quals in the same light as pure maths or economics degrees?
Or would the MSc In Quantitive Finance on top of an engineering degree equalise any disadvantage?

Mathematics vs Maths and Economics? Trinity

Comments