The Student Room Group

Actuarial grad schemes 2016

Scroll to see replies

Original post by EdiAnl
I am only speaking from a student point of view and what I have discovered so far through investigations of my own.
From one student to another I can honestly say studying accountancy or actuary is a bit harsh on yourself i.e. bloody boring. I really enjoyed doing pure maths (even did some stats options) but I think you'll be making life more boring for yourself. Also the top firms favour people who have done internships so it might be better to do any other degree that is more interesting to you and apply for an internship in the sandwich year. That way you're not limiting yourself early on. They do like people who have done some of the exams obviously but they also seem a bit snobbish about it because the graduate programmes in the big 4 are designed to take you from any discipline. Life's too short - my feeling is I'm not too happy about being bored ****less but don't mind if I'm getting paid for it. Also it is important that you get a 2:1 MINIMUM and have good UCAS points. I've struggled cos of only getting 300 UCAS points even though I have a first. Also if you do the internships you can say you understand the business etc etc.it looks great on the CV. However a smaller firm would probably take you straight away as they have less time/money to train you!! I am still deciding what to do myself having applied too late and missed most of the deadlines for 2015!!!!


I see. Could I ask where you studied? I looked at some of the course overviews and the course content actually seemed quite interesting. The thing is If I did maths, I would then have to waste more time studying for the CT and CA exams which I wouldn't need to if I need Actuarial Mathematics.. On a scale of 0-10 how boring is Actuarial Science? BTW Am I correct in assuming you did do maths right? Which university?
I currently study Actuarial Science - and am coming to the end of my placement year.

Personally, I chose the degree because it sounded vastly more interesting that pure maths - and I stand by my decision. I struggled to find a pure maths/stats course that inspired me, but I have loved the vast majority of my degree. Surprise surprise the modules I haven't always enjoyed are the pure ones.

In my (General insurance) team at work the split is probably 50:50 between those who did an actuarial degree and those that didn't. However out of the senior staff they all did pure maths.

I genuinely feel that the degree choice is arbitrary as long as you do well. Get some experience and do the degree you will enjoy.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 42
Original post by Adeel Ali
I see. Could I ask where you studied? I looked at some of the course overviews and the course content actually seemed quite interesting. The thing is If I did maths, I would then have to waste more time studying for the CT and CA exams which I wouldn't need to if I need Actuarial Mathematics.. On a scale of 0-10 how boring is Actuarial Science? BTW Am I correct in assuming you did do maths right? Which university?


I went to Birkbeck College which is full of people who come from the city and do degrees to top up and get promotions. I myself originally wanted to be a teacher but changed my mind - however I always enjoyed maths and found I enjoyed it even more at uni than at school.
I did see a good course in UCL Mathematics with finance options and a sandwich year in business. Computing is good bcause of the use of programming in actuary/financial models.
A lot of Birkbeckians already work in banking or finance sometimes straight from school (usually private/good ones tho!) and already earn quite a bit of money, they are looking for academic qualifications to add on. One friend of mine works for one of the top 4 designing programmes for trading, he was doing the maths degree more for the KUDOS than anything. Financial mathematics with computing might be better because then you could learn a bit of computing and still have the possibility of earning buckets in banking. However I hear with banking again they favour placements so try to look for a course with the possibility of a placement. The degree is also a way of showing your academic prowess not necessarily teaching you how to do the job.
EY to start taking applications next week
Original post by EdiAnl
No. Only if you got less than 320 UCAS points. Kpmg said no way with 300 points and another one called APR said no regardless of getting a 1st. Everyone these days is getting bloody 4 A*'s!!


Are you sure if it's if you get less than 320 UCAS points, and not EXACTLY 240 UCAS points? Can someone please confirm?
Reply 45
I'm going to be applying for grad schemes. I am already on one for software engineering (graduated last July in physics, started last September) but I am hoping this will help rather than hinder me!

I am planning on also getting in touch with recruiters and finding availabilities that aren't necessarily grad schemes - has anybody ever gone down this route? Personally it appeals because I loathe psychometric tests with a burning passion :tongue:
Original post by Dumdadum
I'm going to be applying for grad schemes. I am already on one for software engineering (graduated last July in physics, started last September) but I am hoping this will help rather than hinder me!

I am planning on also getting in touch with recruiters and finding availabilities that aren't necessarily grad schemes - has anybody ever gone down this route? Personally it appeals because I loathe psychometric tests with a burning passion :tongue:


I have friends who went down this route and the impression I got from them was that it was a nicer process to go through opposed to a grad scheme procedure but flexibility of the role you will have once accepted will be less than that of a say a grad scheme.

One option which my friends were highly in favour of were non-grad non-recruitment schemes, so applying for a position where only graduates could apply. This procedure is much better opposed to the grad-schemes final year students usually apply for as far as i know
Original post by 7heMathMagician
Are you sure if it's if you get less than 320 UCAS points, and not EXACTLY 240 UCAS points? Can someone please confirm?


Yes I can confirm this!
Original post by ninegrandstudent
I currently study Actuarial Science - and am coming to the end of my placement year.

Personally, I chose the degree because it sounded vastly more interesting that pure maths - and I stand by my decision. I struggled to find a pure maths/stats course that inspired me, but I have loved the vast majority of my degree. Surprise surprise the modules I haven't always enjoyed are the pure ones.

In my (General insurance) team at work the split is probably 50:50 between those who did an actuarial degree and those that didn't. However out of the senior staff they all did pure maths.

I genuinely feel that the degree choice is arbitrary as long as you do well. Get some experience and do the degree you will enjoy.

Posted from TSR Mobile



Just out of curiousity how have you found your degree so far and your placement? I find your story of how you would find puremath/stats courses uninspiring for you really interesting as I left actuarial science for a puremath/stats degree
Original post by Dumdadum
I'm going to be applying for grad schemes. I am already on one for software engineering (graduated last July in physics, started last September) but I am hoping this will help rather than hinder me!

I am planning on also getting in touch with recruiters and finding availabilities that aren't necessarily grad schemes - has anybody ever gone down this route? Personally it appeals because I loathe psychometric tests with a burning passion :tongue:


Original post by the greatest
I have friends who went down this route and the impression I got from them was that it was a nicer process to go through opposed to a grad scheme procedure but flexibility of the role you will have once accepted will be less than that of a say a grad scheme.

One option which my friends were highly in favour of were non-grad non-recruitment schemes, so applying for a position where only graduates could apply. This procedure is much better opposed to the grad-schemes final year students usually apply for as far as i know



Out of interest, how would you actually go down this route? Most (all?) companies that employ actuaries in the UK have a graduate scheme advertised on the website. Surely if you were to contact HR then they would just tell you to apply for the scheme
Original post by the greatest
Just out of curiousity how have you found your degree so far and your placement? I find your story of how you would find puremath/stats courses uninspiring for you really interesting as I left actuarial science for a puremath/stats degree


I have loved my degree! The Act Sci course at Kent seems to offer a good mix of the Actuarial modules as well as purer stuff, I have never felt bored or restricted. My placement I have absolutely loved. I have three weeks left (having extended for six weeks) and don't want to leave. The company I have worked for us small and so I have had real involvement and in depth exposure. They don't run a graduate scheme but I am hoping there will be a actuarial assistant role come available next year so I can return!

My degree has definitely helped me with understanding concepts and the theory behind the work I am doing, but equally I wouldn't say it is vital for the job. For me it confirmed my degree was the right choice, but as I really enjoy the modules I have done it wasn't something I regret anyway!

Hope that helps!
Original post by orange crush
Out of interest, how would you actually go down this route? Most (all?) companies that employ actuaries in the UK have a graduate scheme advertised on the website. Surely if you were to contact HR then they would just tell you to apply for the scheme



Most companies do offer graduate schemes correct, but not just graduate schemes but traditional ways as well for non recent graduates who have experience already and wish to apply or for even graduates as well are able to apply for this.

Recruitment companies are a bit different where in many cases you are either headhunted or you speak to someone from a recruitment company and in certain situations can help you find jobs on a part time basis i.e. half a year or a year perhaps. This positions usually are well in pay and offer good prospects for further applications via the second option I provided above.

I still maintain the opinion that regardless of the options above, if you get in it doesn't really matter how you got in. For certain companies graduate schemes are the best way possible to get in the sense they are the easiest, which might not make sense considering in many cases its the hardest.
Reply 52
Original post by orange crush
Out of interest, how would you actually go down this route? Most (all?) companies that employ actuaries in the UK have a graduate scheme advertised on the website. Surely if you were to contact HR then they would just tell you to apply for the scheme


Most, sure and I'm planning on applying for every grad scheme I have an interest in and can. But I figured that since I want to stay in Scotland and not be in London I'm already cutting the number of opportunities open to me by a big chunk and want to try and maximise my chances. One of the recruiters I got in touch with last week has got back about putting me forward for a trainee job that is currently not being advertised anywhere or on the employer's website so that's a good start at least to my recruiter experience.

We shall see how it all goes though. I've spent this evening creating a colour-coded list of grad schemes based off the IFA directory of employees list so am feeling super cool and organised now :tongue:
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Dumdadum
Most, sure and I'm planning on applying for every grad scheme I have an interest in and can. But I figured that since I want to stay in Scotland and not be in London I'm already cutting the number of opportunities open to me by a big chunk and want to try and maximise my chances. One of the recruiters I got in touch with last week has got back about putting me forward for a trainee job that is currently not being advertised anywhere or on the employer's website so that's a good start at least to my recruiter experience.

We shall see how it all goes though. I've spent this evening creating a colour-coded list of grad schemes based off the IFA directory of employees list so am feeling super cool and organised now :tongue:


I have a colour coded list :tongue:


Can I ask how you are finding out about these recruiters, though?
Reply 54
Original post by orange crush
I have a colour coded list :tongue:


Can I ask how you are finding out about these recruiters, though?


I googled "actuarial recruiter" or something along those lines and contacted one or two that I liked the look of :smile:
Hi guys, wondering if you know if KPMG has any actuarial internship opportunities? I know for EY and PwC and Deloitte, actuarial is parked under Consulting, can't seem to find it for KPMG though..
Original post by in-reveries
Hi guys, wondering if you know if KPMG has any actuarial internship opportunities? I know for EY and PwC and Deloitte, actuarial is parked under Consulting, can't seem to find it for KPMG though..


There's Pensions here: http://www.kpmgcareers.co.uk/undergraduates/vacation-programme/tax-and-pensions-vac/pensions#.VcxxhxNVikp
I would definitely recommend contacting a couple of specialist actuarial recruiters. I often see my recruiter contacts on LinkedIn advertising positions for graduates. I'm an actuarial analyst at an insurance company, probably about a year away from being in a position where I'm recruiting analysts myself assuming I remain in the same company and I would definitely use recruiters as a hiring manager. We do have a grad scheme but also use recruiters (and other means, HR etc) when we need to fill a position outside of the usual grad cycle. There is no substantial difference between those that come in on the grad scheme vs. not. At my place I think the grad scheme is really good for those in operational positions as it's a fast-track to management really, outside of ops positions though (e.g. actuarial) there is no fast-track and so no substantial difference between those that come through the 'grad scheme' vs. those that come through recruiters. There is no fast track because it's a technical and difficult area that takes decent experience to acquire the appropriate expertise. Only difference is that HR are more involved in the grad scheme- which is not always a good thing. If you're good (and you won't be recruited if you're not!) you will get all the training and internal development courses you need whether you're a 'grad scheme' or not!

Don't be bedazzled by "grad schemes". There is no difference between an actuarial grad scheme and an actuarial graduate job! It's just that larger companies recruit many graduates all at the same time and so use the graduate scheme to manage this process and integrate the new recruits into the business.

Good luck in your apps.
(edited 8 years ago)
Out of interest, which of these areas normally have better compensation, working hours, and more interesting work (obviously this is subjective, just wondering if anyone thinks any of the business lines are particularly boring)?

Investment consulting (for pensions schemes etc.)
Pensions consulting
Risk consulting (Insurance, life and non-life)
Talent and Rewards consulting

Thanks in advance for any input! I'm currently looking into internships and I've only recently started considering actuarial consulting. I find that there isn't much on actuarial careers as compared to IB or management consulting :frown:

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending