Princeton University: M. Fin

Besides loafing around at the Princeton Club in NY and a random alumni cousin, I do not have any other connections with Princeton University. The Masters of Finance program at the Bendheim Center for Finance is arguably the strongest and most well positioned business program in all of North America. LSE’s program on Econometrics may be the only true counterpart to this specialized program.

Unlike MBAs, this degree is excellent preparation for quant heavy Hedge Fund, IB, and Private Equity positions on Wall Street and elsewhere. Now I am certain that many MBAs will take offense at this but I have to say it" “The business school Brand” and “Alumni Networks” are surely an effective tool in getting those coveted positions, however the M.Fin degree actually gives you the mathematical and theiretical underpinnings to get the job done.

The core of business is Finance and Accounting, so I would recommend looking closely at this highly competitive yet very rewarding degree.

http://www.princeton.edu/~bcf/mreq.htm

The interdisciplinary Bendheim Center for Finance offers a Master in Finance degree. The distinctive feature of Princeton’s Master in Finance program is its strong emphasis on financial economics in addition to financial engineering and computational methods. Graduates of our program have a solid understanding of the fundamental quantitative tools from economic theory, probability, statistics, optimization and computer science, all of which are becoming increasingly vital in the financial industry. To a greater degree than at any time in the past, there now exists a body of knowledge that is widely agreed to be essential for the proper analysis and management of financial securities, portfolios and the financial decisions of firms. A driving force behind these developments is a lively exchange of ideas between academia and the financial industry, a collaboration that is the closest parallel in the social sciences to the academic-private sector interactions routinely seen in engineering and the applied sciences.

Re: Princeton University: M. Fin

dah! no one can say that they wasted their time and money in their respective stupid program, otherwise they really were gem from the beginning :hehe:

hain, yeh kisay hota hai. sorry can you (or any one else) explain it with examples.

Re: Princeton University: M. Fin

dah! no one can say that they wasted their time and money in their respective stupid program, otherwise they really were gem from the beginning :hehe:

Ofcourse I don’t expect them to come here and publically say that “Yes I wasted 1-2 years of my life.” On your own, you know if you wasted your time and money :slight_smile:

**
hain, yeh kisay hota hai. sorry can you (or any one else) explain it with examples.**

Sorry I was typing too quickly and missed the word “mathematical and theoretical underpinning.”

Sure, I would be happy to explain further: If you look at the tracks (http://www.princeton.edu/~bcf/mtracks.htm) and courses, you will find a very quantitive curriculum. Up until recently many MBAs had said that non B-school programs are more towards the academic/research tracks, however this program absolutely demolishes that notion by bringing in a more practical and useful plan of study.

Just like accountants don’t have to rely on the brand of their university or the strength of their networks (unlike the MBAs), this program does the same.

We’re talking a career pathway:

M.Fin → Goldman Sach’s Trader → Own Hedge Fund

Ofcourse this pathway is dependent on individual ability and interest.

Re: Princeton University: M. Fin

who said all non B-school tracks are focused on research?

u have programs like MMM at Northwestern, Masters in marketing at Northwestern, ppl doign masters in accounting, finance, ops mgmt, and stats etc have always had doors of industry open to them.

They tend to go for more specific tracks though. MBAs used to be more generalists untikl MBA programs started getting focusing more indepth on certain fields, and u staretd seing MBA in finance or MBA in marketing, even then they tend to be exposed to more general mgmt than ppl going the MS route and that generalist approach helps them and hinders them at the same time.

also you are looking at one program at a very prestigious university, when you look at the big picture it changes. I wouldnt really call it an exception but its not a common phenomenon.

Re: Princeton University: M. Fin

who said all non B-school tracks are focused on research?

That is the general sentiment based on recruitment patterns of Fortune 500 firms. An MBA degree is considered to be more 'practical' based on the course work/recruitment push generally geared towards the corporate world. Masters in Econ, Stats, or even Doctorates in Business Admin are more focused towards the ivory tower/policy think tank type positions. Just look at their career offices.

**
u have programs like MMM at Northwestern, Masters in marketing at Northwestern, ppl doign masters in accounting, finance, ops mgmt, and stats etc have always had doors of industry open to them.
**

Its not about having doors of industry open to them. Someone with a Masters in Math or a Ph.D in Chemistry can possibly get a job in industry. None of those programs Non-MBA programs boast the placement records of this particular M. Fin degree.

The placement record is what I am focusing on. This is a quant heavy program that matches up exceedingly well against the top 10 MBAs in terms of placements while delivering the rigorous study of a non-MBA program (including those mentioned by you).

**
They tend to go for more specific tracks though. MBAs used to be more generalists untikl MBA programs started getting focusing more indepth on certain fields, and u staretd seing MBA in finance or MBA in marketing, even then they tend to be exposed to more general mgmt than ppl going the MS route and that generalist approach helps them and hinders them at the same time.
**

The Generalist MBA is probably the greatest waste of time & money. If one is good enough, a top firm like Mckinsey can provide roughly the same experience including the network without having to incur lost wages. In fact, many have forgone the B-School option for this very reason.

I know where your going with the 'specializations' in the MBA programs. Unfortunately, even with the specializations we're talking essentially talking about a focused set of electives aren't we?

Take Wharton's MBA in Accounting program. Very well respected, yet the coursework in Accounting does not begin until the second year, even then there is no assurance of the availability of the classes due to the scheduling/recruitment focus. Sure a Wharton grad will get that great job with excellent pay, however did he get the full academic enrichment comparable to an MSA? No.

This brings me to the main point, many MBA degree seekers are looking for the stamp of "professionalism" rather than a true graduate degree. Unlike their counterparts in Law or Medicine, MBA seekers are not exposed to any "confidential/industry specific" knowledge during their studies, so the experience becomes diluted with fluffery and the recruiting starts on day one. Even at the most prestigious B-Schools, the entire experience becomes a vacation from work or a way to re live the crazy college days.

If Columbia Business did not consistently place its graduates on Wall Street with 100-200K salaries, would there be a mad dash to apply or attend? I don't think so. Ironically, the Ph.D. in Economics whose coursework and academic preparation outdistances his MBA counterparts will probably earn less compensation if he stays in academia or face greater opportunity costs if he joins the corporate world.

**
also you are looking at one program at a very prestigious university, when you look at the big picture it changes. I wouldnt really call it an exception but its not a common phenomenon.**

From the academic rigor of this program to the placement record, only LSE's Econometrics program matches up well. It is an exception due to its selectivity, courses, and the level of faculty exposure.

Most of all, it is an excellent buy because the student is not cheated out of a truly rigorous academic experience combined with assurance of being placed in a position. To me, it is a complete experience.

I sound like shill but this program impresses me that much.

Re: Princeton University: M. Fin

pak-one,

Financial Engineering programs (as they’re called these days) have been around for many years and have always been very rigorous in their content and their approach.

A graduate degree in finance / mathematical finance does offer an alternative to a traditional MBA – esp. for someone who is interested mainly in the theoretical knowledge and specialized skills to develop financial instruments and to understand the role of financial instruments within the broader economic and business contexts.

Before opting for an MBA, I was personally considering it myself as it offered me with a great opportunity to combine my background and aptitude in economics, mathematics, statistics, computer science with the business knowledge that I was seeking.

However, after doing a little bit of research and talking to people who were already working in a related capacity, I realized that I didn’t want to be stuck in one industry for all my life. I mean, there’s great variety within the industry - banks, investment firms, brokerage houses and other financial institutions, but the skills are not truly transferable outside that industry. Perhaps one could work at risk management departments of large corporations and consulting firms but that’s pretty much it. Also, if someone is interested in strategy, then financial analysis offers one type of input to such an endeavour. With an MBA, you get to work at a high level where you learn enough about the various types of inputs required to craft an appropriate organizational strategy including financial, operational, marketing, human perspectives.

Also, having worked in a management consulting firm for three years, I have to disagree that you’ll learn the equivalent of an MBA from your job. Again, yes, may be you’ll be well versed in both theory and practice in the area(s) that you’re working in directly, but not the other business areas that need to complement yours - an MBA will provide you with the background to ascertain effective linkages in all business areas that will constitute an inclusive roadmap for your client firm.

That’s the main reason where I won’t discount the value of an MBA… it really depends on what it is that you want to do. Yes, if you are a quant person and your aspirations are to work with one specific aspect of the overall business strategy – i.e. financial, then a Masters in Finance / Mathematical Finance etc. will be appropriate.

In terms of programs, I’m not too familiar with the Princeton one, but one of my friends recently completed his program in Computational Finance from the Tepper School of Business (Carnegie Mellon) and I’ve been thoroughly impressed by the rigor of that program. Here’s a link:
http://www.tepper.cmu.edu/master-in-computational-finance/the-mscf-program/index.aspx
.

Re: Princeton University: M. Fin

so its not MBA's procliaming that but it is an industry preference, and industry tries to do what is right for them.

the issue has been that many programs like MS finance or MS econ were structured in a theoretical manner, so academia was simply not meeting industry needs in that respect

depends onw hat you mean by placement records, 100% placement rate sounds pretty good to me. Now if we go into starting salaries and all, that I dont know about.

and again its one particular M fin degree, maybe other schools should wake up and structure their programs differently.

so one M-fin program that you see is placing in a manner competitive to MBA programs. what is this telling you?

and by that token so is mfin, if you are good nuff and have a degree in math or stats, or even liberal arts, you can be picked up by an Investment Bank and be trained.

the generalist MBA is something that is in demand in the industry. no wonder that many executives even go into part time or executive MBAs because aside from its 'technical' value, it is a credential that is in demand, is accepted and expected as ppl are climbing up corporate ladders.

so while you or I can wax lyrical about usefulness or uselessness of an MBA program, even a generalist one, the fact that industry values it, thats what is important

deepnds on the program. The question as noted earlier was, what they are learning, is it being valued by the industry.

if the guy wants to be an deep accounting expert than probably not, but for teh type of roles these ppl are recruited into its more than enough.

teh distinction is similar to engineers versus engineering technologists.

its a professional degree. and what is the harm in someone who wants that rather than deep functional expertise in one area? in many cases as industry woudl show, ppl with a more well rounded outlook are needed.

fulffery, recruiting efforts..whatever it is, teh point is that these ppl are in demand,

an amusing statement especially since one of teh basic criteria you noted to explain the attractiveness of this program was its placement rates and potential career path.

and what is this telling peope, specialists and deep expertise in one field only is not usually rewarded as much. B-schools are reacting to what industry demands,

you just restated exactly what I said, this is one very selective, prestigious program, and is an exception to the rule.

its an excellent buy if that is what a student wants, so to you..it may be an excellent experience, and I am not arguing that, but similarly MBAs are excellent experiences for many who do that.

good program, hopefully other programs will learn from it and structure tehmselves and appeal to teh industry in a manner that they would provide deep subject education while creating high demand for their graduates

Re: Princeton University: M. Fin

Guaranteed high-level placement is a thing of the past... there are so many schools and so many accriditations, that expecting guaranteed placement is just not realistic, even at IVY League Schools, which charge an arm and a leg (and more) so the ROI might not be worth the risk. And I guarantee that at those levels, there's a definite element of "profiling" (but for different reasons)

What you can do is make sure to maximize your chances of landing yourself a career by ensuring that the school you go to has the following:

1) Regional Accreditation (for American schools)
2) Professional Accreditation (e.g AACSB and the like)
3) Professional ties with corporate entities

And it may not only be the name-tag of the school... your persona has a lot to do with it also.

Another valuable asset is Professional Designation/Certification: PEng, PMP, CA, CGA/CPA/CMA etc...

PS: pak-one, no offence taken... :) you're correct that MBA degree is quickly losing its utility (I should use the marginal utility notation here though)

Re: Princeton University: M. Fin

hypnotix- ivy league MBA programs have a 100% placement rate. vast majority of the MBAs have offers beforethey finish their MBAs, some hold out for better offers. and it is virtually unheard of an ivy league or other top MBA program graduate who is looking for a job to not get one.

I dont disagree with your points on school image, network, person's own ability. itsjust that usually the top schools have the strongest networks and image, and as far as student quality, they are selective so they get good students, those who would have done whether they were at wharton or kellogg or they were at florida state or oklahoma.

Re: Princeton University: M. Fin

Agreed. I think I meant to say that in terms of ROI these days you will not get what you're aspiring to get, even at an IVY League school (on its own).

Re: Princeton University: M. Fin

well if we go by data of a few years back the ROI is 12% annualized for top 10 schools and 18% annualized for non top 10 schools. although some ofthat is due to teh fact that the ivy MBAs had higher paying jobs prior to their MBAs as well.

some interesting insights from a survey are here. looking at earnings, roi and payback etc

http://www.gmac.com/NR/rdonlyres/6B81E15E-0A57-4E84-B39D-E3B57483B4BD/0/RR0616_ValueAdded.pdf

52 percent salary increase on average for those obtaining an MBA.

the total return on investment over 10 years is 177 percent or nearly 18 percent on an annual basis.

the graduates of the Top 10 MBA
schools in fact earn significantly more than those who are
not from the Top 10. The difference between the Top 10
graduate’s base salary at graduation ($96,420) and those
not from the Top 10 ($79,703) is substantial

graduates from
schools outside the Top 10 experienced increases in salary
that were nearly equal to the Top 10 (54 percent and 56
percent, respectively). In other words, in terms of the
percentage increase from their pre-MBA salaries, graduates
from schools below the Top 10 in the rankings did just as
well as their Top 10 peers.

the payback period for graduates of the
Top 10 programs is longer by 15 months on average. For
specific schools, the payback period can be much longer.
As reported by Lavelle (2006), the payback period for
Top 10 schools Harvard, Stanford and MIT is more than
14 years.

Re: Princeton University: M. Fin

I would say this info is gold! You don't happen to be a placement/HR consultant do you? :) Perhaps not lol

Re: Princeton University: M. Fin

no, I just get asked questions and I serve as mentors to students at both my grad and undergrad unis so many of the same questions come up there as well.

I have helped place ppl as well just because if i know ppl and I can help someone then why not. but I dont do it professionally :D

2 Likes

Re: Princeton University: M. Fin

Philanthropy has its rewards. Good for you man! :)
If you know of anyone looking to hire a high-tech project manager, lemme know lol :D