UChicago MSFM vs MIT MFin – Which is better for landing quant trading/dev roles at top firms?
From what I understand, MIT MFin is broader — more finance plus some quant, while UChicago MSFM is very math-heavy and geared toward quant finance. But I’m not sure which one actually places better into top trading firms or gives more direct prep for coding/math-intensive interviews. Also, how do these two programs compare in terms of reputation in the quant world, recruiter access, and alumni presence in firms like DRW, IMC, or Hudson River?
Asked by Karthik Iyer 4 months ago
Content Writer
For quant trading or dev roles at firms like Jane Street or Citadel, UChicago’s MSFM has a more focused edge than MIT MFin.
UChicago MSFM is built around stochastic calculus, C++/Python-heavy coursework, and direct prep for quant interviews. It’s highly technical and aligns closely with what top quant firms test — brain teasers, probability, market microstructure, and systems design. Alumni from MSFM often land at DRW, Jump, and IMC, especially through research or internship pipelines.
MIT MFin, while prestigious, is more finance and portfolio-theory focused. It does have solid quant electives and coding exposure, but it’s broader in scope. If the goal is quant trading, MSFM gives more direct preparation — both in curriculum and in the kind of recruiters that show up.
MIT does better for roles like quant research at hedge funds or quant-strategy within banks. For core trading or dev at HFT firms, UChicago has the better fit.
