treasuries

How about econometric theorists again after 5 years? I'm favoring Peter CB Phillips and Peter Robinson. :hmm:

Interesting rankings...

If you want to pursue a career in the banking industry to specialize in data analytics and risk management, definitely, it's SAS. And I'm talking of major banks here. But I'm not really sure if it will be really useful if your track is the academe. But it's always nice to learn something new. You'll never know when you'll need it. Perhaps in a consulting project in the future.

I especially agree with the last point made above. When I started doing consulting work the projects I had were small-time. Just simple statistical analysis and reports. It was referral from people who had seen my work that I got projects and was able to charge a real consultant's fee. Reputation via word-of-mouth is critical in sustaining a consulting business. By the way, in my case I worked alone as a consultant. And being associated with a university I did not really need to market myself and it helped in making a good first impression to potential clients.

If you can afford it then go for LSE.

Yup! Pretty exciting for someone who wants to specialize in this area. Some of my friends could have gone there after being admitted. But it's just too expensive!

I think someone's decision to choose LSE over other top US programs will be based on that person's research interest. I'm into econometrics and I will choose the top 10 (EconPhD.net's overall ranking) over an LSE PhD. Below that, I'll choose LSE. But remember that if you are into policy research, you know, hoping to work at World Bank, etc. after your PhD, I think the network and experience coming from the proximity of Georgetown will give you a good deal if you choose it. Also, if you have specific people you might want to mentor you in your dissertation then you choose that program. In LSE you have top econometricians like Oliver Linton.

LSE. No question about it.

Practice, practice & more practice. Focus on some areas where you might be relatively weak although you're not aware of it, say for example, simple combinatorics. The exam is tricky but you should practice how to spot a question that tries to trick you so you won't fall into the trap. :2cents:

Congratulations, Antonio! You got 1 out of 3. See, I told ya. We can speculate all we want and bet on our best guess but we will never know for sure.

Just a related question. How old is one's GRE score still valid? Is it 2 years or 5 years? Some of us might need to retake the GRE if it's only 2 years and, of course, risk getting a lower score than 800 for the Q part.

I used Kaplan in my review before and got an 800Q when my max was only 730 in the simulated tests. It's more difficult than the actual exam based on my experience so it should be beneficial. I've been recommending it to friends.

It doesn't really matter. Europe has more than enough this year. France got one and Germany got two this year in Physics and Chemistry and another one a year or two before. Perhaps Economics is just a tough nut to crack for Europe. Shouldn't Sir C.W. Granger (he's still European) count? And then another one on literature!

Develop exotic financial products like derivatives. Although Emanuel Derman has a PhD in nuclear physics, he is the kind of person (I guess) that those pursuing PhD in finance try to follow. Unlike before when quants were obscure people behind complex financial products developed by those with PhD background in mathematics and physics, quants now may come from those with PhD in finance. This program has already evolved into something highly mathematical making the quant profession accessible. IMO, you are wasting your PhD training if you just end up as a trader or even as a portfolio manager. An undegrad would suffice for a trader and an MBA for a portfolio manager.

Seriously now. I agree with you. It will be difficult for Levitt to win a Nobel.