Salary.sg Forums

Originally Posted by Unregistered

To the TS, why don't you just apply all and see what you get?

I have friends in FO who have never attended networking sessions but yet get called up for interviews.

Instead of day-dreaming or asking if you have a chance, just whack and see what you get? It's similar to applying to an ivy league school. If you're an average, and not genius level candidate, sometimes you get one school but not another. Say you get Brown but not Cornell and vice versa.

Just apply all and prepare like mad for interviews. Of course, if you can network your way inside, that would be best.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I agree with your 1 to 7. But I disagree with your opinion that for all high paying and exclusive jobs, it's the manager that seeks out the candidates.

You are right in some ways. But in line with what the TS is looking for, the job applicant applying method does work, provided your resume and interview meets 1 to 7.

I'm speaking this for the entry level jobs at investment banks and funds, FO positions, quant or not. I believe you agree with me that the selection process is structured - applications opens through school recruitment pages or on website. And they hire in seasons, always like a mid-year intake. Those hired are the ones that has APPLIED THEMSELVES.

Your view is correct for like a 15 years experience portfolio manager or manging director. Yes, headhunters does facilitate the process. But for high paying entry level or 3 years experience jobs in FO finance, the traditional application through website does work. Again, assuming your resume is up to the mark. But there isn't the need for head hunters.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

1) go through the 300 see if anyone i know
2) filter out those with relevant exp
3) filer out those with relevant qualification
4) look for the best, preferably those with something beyond studies to show
5) take the short listed 10 cvs and ask ard the industry anyone got recommendations
6) cut down to 5 interviews
7) pick the 1 i like best.

Originally Posted by TheSpartanguy

Thanks a lot. You have put it perfectly. I cannot claim to be anywhere near the top percentile of candidates in terms of anything. My selling points are basically my strong mathematics and domain knowledge (how that knowledge transforms to bottom line PnL is yet to be tested), programming and my ability to do research on topics and develop it by original thinking.

So if anyone hires me, it has to be essentially based on evidence of mathematical knowledge (if they care about research publications etc.) and a promise of value in the future, not a proven track record in the domain of trading.

That said, I had a few motivations behind this thread, no offence intended to anyone. Sorry for making my reasons so long winded, and thanks for reading if you do.

1. I attended two career events in the quant divisions of J. P. Morgan and Barclays, intended for fresh Ph.D. graduates in non-finance but quantitative fields. The speaker at J. P. Morgan Hong Kong, for example, did his Ph.D. in physics, although about ten years back. Those people made the selection sound a little bit easier than I find it here. I fully expected to be grilled at the interview with questions from geometric Brownian motions to Ito's integral etc. and hoped that my academic credential could get me to the interview. But there was no indication that I have to develop a .1% faster algo before I join. But maybe it is their duty to be extra nice at career events and make it all look like a cakewalk.
2. I also figured that banks like Goldman to J. P. Morgan etc. are true behemoths, whether it is London, NYC or Singapore, and graduates from Stanford to MIT line up for those positions. Hence, my somewhat reduced expectation at Asian Banks, e.g. DBS or any other second tier banks like RBS etc. This is not meant to question anyone's credibility, but just reality as I felt it.
3. I saw a number of LikedIn profiles from similar or someone less impressive educational backgrounds working as Quants in investment banks, in HK and in Singapore. I do not have a masters in quantitative finance, but by self-study, I have mastered a number of important topics. I am not claiming it to be easy, but I felt I can convince a manager that I can learn fast and by myself even if my degree does not say quantitative finance. Now, it is possible that those guys had developed some impressive trading algorithm before they graduated, but kinda unlikely.
4. And this is the most relevant one. The websites of foreign banks like JPM, GS seem much more well-organised to quickly match my credentials with the open positions. This is not a job offer, but the application processes are very smooth and easy with detailed job descriptions, expectations ec. So it does not leave any ambiguity whether I am applying for the correct position. This is what I found missing in DBS for example. I did not ask for any secret process to give me an easy pass, but merely the standard application process for fresher quants as found in the JPM website. I should have made it clearer earlier.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Good insight. I'll go a step further and say that the quant work the TS is looking for is NOT the quant work in wealth management. If I am not wrong, wealth management is all about sales and asset allocation. There is NO quant work.

Basically, wealth management is to allocate capital to various funds, can be discretionary macro, long short equities OR quant funds. The TS is looking for work in one of these quant funds. So don't both with wealth management.

Also, he mentioned about derivative pricing which is not a fund strategy. Derivative pricing is done by the banks. But I get what you mean by giving him alternative options.

I agree with you that the industry is shrinking, more so in Singapore. I used to search quantiative analyst and quantiative developer jobs in Singapore and they're becoming less and less.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Yup, I also second your opinion about the quant job market in Singapore. I occasionally browse through the bulge bracket banks' career section and very few, if not none, advertise quantitative modelling roles. Such work is done in NYC or London.

Further more, I think by nature quantitative trading has reached a point where you'll have to be that 0.5 percentile guy to have an edge in the market, thereby be employable. A little specifics here.

If we talk about algorithmic trading, the technology has matured to the point where in order for you to be relevant, you'll need to edge of your competitors by executing trades 100ms faster. In order for you to achieve that, you'll probably need years and years of testing different infrastructure (FPGA, GPU) or devising different algorithms (multithreading). I worked at a few companies where you could have a guy spend 6 months trying to gain this extra bit of speed but still not succeed.

While the TS has a PhD, I believe in his ability to conduct research. I also believe that he'll have to start from ground zero to think of novel ways to add value to the fund or bank. Really, companies will bring him on board if they project that he'll be that right guy to eventually add value in the future, like 2 years.

It's really betting on his ability to achieve something that is not yet defined. And that is a hard proposition to convince an employer to do.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

This is the market reality I was alluding to earlier. Thanks for sharing.

There's just way too many people looking for quant jobs in the banks and the banks themselves are spoilt for choice and are really looking for other qualities like network, some sort of business related achievement or prior experience. They aren't interested in a PhD guy like TS telling people how relevant his programming or academic PhD is.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

i am not a quant and not working in financial industry, but i've been looking into a mine into a quant kind of role since 2012, and eventually give up in 2014. this is what i feel about the quant market in singapore. btw my background is EE and i did both gpu and fpga stuff for large scale high performance computing and low latency, near realtime application, plus i self studied stochastic calculus, derivative pricing and those quant stuff. so i am fairly familier with the industry.

during my 2 years trying to break into quant finance, i notice a big difference of quant position in singapore and those in london or nyc. most sg quant role ask for execl, sometimes vba as well, while most quant position in london and nyc ask c++, with a few java. i think this clearly shows that the real quant role as TS meant is not in existence in local banks. there're a couple quant role locally i remember asking more advanced technical skills, almost all from algo trading firm like virtu, or kcg.

i know a ntu physics phd whose thesis was on derivatives and liquidity modeling. she told me she did a master in financial engineering and could not find a job, so she continued with a phd, and still cannot find a quant job. eventually she joined an internet tech firm, and find some of the skills r still relevant and useful.

i myself tried to switch from ee to quant for 2 years, and eventually gave up, and switch to data science, which has a lot of demand right now.

i would suggest the TS while continue to.look for quant job, give data science a try. seriously it is much easier in terms of the math or statistics involved. i think quant finance is shrinking worldwide, may well give data analytics a shot