Actually, I already have a master of financial maths and statistics at HKUST....with a decent academic record...I have got many interviews from top tier I-banks like UBS, CS, DB, Barclays, SG....but failed....so I wanna equip myself with deeper understanding in particular the field of credit/market risk. for Quant, you need to compete with PhD and top MFE from UCB,NYU, Princeton, Columbia.... for risk analyst, not many of them intend to join risk department due to the unattractive compensation system....(on the other hand, I wanna work as a risk analyst....and I believe that the risk management program at ETH should be one of the most structured program in this area...their renowned faculties in risk management like Paul Embracts, Philip Schbonchers, Delbaen.....) the professors at HKUST told me that in term of course structure, ETH should be better than LSE and UMich... but LSE has its brand name at London and the location advantage...but their faculties are not that strong in risk management... UMich, only good thing is the interdisciplinary course structure with the back up from Ross business School....but their faculties in financial engineering/quantitative finance are not that well known as ETH and even LSE....(Unlike other top MFE in US, Columbia : E.Derman, Paul Glasserman, Steven Kou, Cornell: Robert Jarrow, NYU: Peter Carr, UCB: Mark Roberstein, Stanford: Duffy...... What's more, it is less risky to take ETH program as the tuition fee is cheap....and I may apply NYU, UCB, Princeton MFE upon completion of ETH program if I can not find a decent position in Quant Team......... |