The Student Room Group

Best possible degree for Investment Banking?

Scroll to see replies

Alexey
Quant analysis most often requires PhD level.


:ditto: I think most quants have PhDs
Cambridge Maths Part III.
Fidelis Oditah QC SAN
Cambridge Maths Part III.


agreed.
Reply 23
Fidelis Oditah QC SAN
Cambridge Maths Part III.


For the more quantitative trading roles like derivates etc I'd say this is the best course in the country, however Cambridge Economics is probably better overall. For M&A I would say Economics edges it.
Reply 24
Fidelis Oditah QC SAN
Cambridge Maths Part III.
Yeah, if you want to be heavily involved in derivatives trading. For other positions (analyst or sales) I'd say not.
westhamfan
However a PhD sounds a little much? surely they would get the picture that you were good at maths with a first or 2:1 in a numerical degree at Bachelors level?? I mean unless you want to be an actuary, as long as you cover statistics modules surely the real life application of the maths wouldnt be any higher than BsC level?

If you are talking of a BSc level Economics degree, I would disagree. One of the most quantitative courses at the LSE undergrad is Quantitative Finance (3rd year module), the prerequisites of which are Full year courses in Micro, Econometrics and Corporate Finance and even that doesn't set you up for trading structured derivatives. I know for a fact that on the synthetic CDO desk of one of the BBs, EVERYONE has atleast one PhD (one of them havinf received doctorate twice: Physics and econometrics).
That desk will be the exception rather than the rule. It tends to be about 30% PhDs.
Reply 27
I have a place at Oxford to read physics next year. If I wanted a front office job, would I need to do a masters, such as MPhil in Finance from Cambridge? Would my physics degree alone be quantitative enough for a trading roll in, say, derivatives? I know that I would need a PhD to to quantitative analysis.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Reply 28
malhotra
If you are talking of a BSc level Economics degree, I would disagree. One of the most quantitative courses at the LSE undergrad is Quantitative Finance (3rd year module), the prerequisites of which are Full year courses in Micro, Econometrics and Corporate Finance and even that doesn't set you up for trading structured derivatives. I know for a fact that on the synthetic CDO desk of one of the BBs, EVERYONE has atleast one PhD (one of them havinf received doctorate twice: Physics and econometrics).


What about the Imperial Maths with stats for finance? Thats a Bsc, do you think thats enough?
westhamfan
What about the Imperial Maths with stats for finance? Thats a Bsc, do you think thats enough?

This hardly provides any details of the modules, so can't say.
sng
I have a place at Oxford to read physics next year. If I wanted a front office job, would I need to do a masters, such as MPhil in Finance from Cambridge? Would my physics degree alone be quantitative enough for a trading roll in, say, derivatives? I know that I would need a PhD to to quantitative analysis.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.


I'm finishing 4 year Physics at Oxford this year, I've got a grad offer on exotic rates derivatives trading. Did an internship on FX and structured credit. You dnt need a phd or an mphil to do this stuff, physics will do you nicely.
Reply 31
Olek
I'm finishing 4 year Physics at Oxford this year, I've got a grad offer on exotic rates derivatives trading. Did an internship on FX and structured credit. You dnt need a phd or an mphil to do this stuff, physics will do you nicely.


thanks for the reply.

but what are you specialising in this year? i thought that the fourth year was not worth doing if you do not want to go into research. is it looked upon favourably by investors/would you recommend it?

thanks again.
Most people do the 4th year. I don't know if it's looked on more or less favourably. I don't really care. I did it because I don't think you can call it a physics degree until you can do GR. That, and the idea of finishing my degree aged 20 was horrifying.
Olek
Most people do the 4th year. I don't know if it's looked on more or less favourably. I don't really care. I did it because I don't think you can call it a physics degree until you can do GR. That, and the idea of finishing my degree aged 20 was horrifying.


Very, very true.
oxford don't teach GR in the third year? I know it's tough but still I'm surprised.
You learnt it in 3rd year then?
Olek
You learnt it in 3rd year then?


no, it's not my area, I'm just surprised they could give a Bachelors in physics without teaching such a major topic.
It's a third year option at Imp if you do some preparatory work over the summer, but for the majority of people it's a 4th year topic. I think people don't realise that physics degrees are actually quite broad in terms of content and also even at A-level physics/maths, you are only learning the bare basics; compared to topics like english language which is developed relatively better during school years.
Reply 38
To teach GR properly would require perquisites that take up large portions of a maths degree. General Relativity is a theory of gravity which is described by the mathematics of differential geometry. Now I'm not suggesting that you need to understand the inner workings of bundle structures to take on board the gist of the theory, infact a rudimentary course can be constructed from basic assumed knowledge of variational principles.

GR is one of these things that can be be attacked from high, or low, brow methods. So I don' think anyone can take too much from the fact that their course does or doesn't teach it at undergrad level. Additionally, I very much doubt the people at the banks will mind too much!
Reply 39
For the OP and others interested in maths at Imperial, a complete course structure, good read:

http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/portal/pls/portallive/docs/1/7289065.PDF

Btw: I am making Mathematics with Statistics for finance my firm, seems like a very good course.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending