UChicago MSFM vs MIT MFin – Which is better for landing quant trading/dev roles at top firms?

I’ve been admitted to both the University of Chicago's Master in Financial Mathematics (MSFM) and MIT's Master of Finance (MFin) program, and I’m mainly aiming for quant trading or quant developer roles at firms like Jane Street, Citadel, or Jump.
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?
Read more

Asked by Karthik Iyer 4 months ago

Isha B

Isha B

MSBA Student at SMU

In quant hiring, alignment with interview demands often matters more than overall brand.

UChicago MSFM
 • Focuses on probability theory, stochastic processes, and PDEs, all core to quant brainteasers.
 • Strong programming component in C++ and Python prepares candidates for coding screens early on.
 • Chicago-based firms like Jump, DRW, and Citadel Securities have a visible MSFM alumni network and direct hiring presence.

MIT MFin
 • Offers a balance of quant finance and broader topics, appealing if there’s interest in hedge funds, banks, or multi-strategy firms.
 • On-campus recruiting includes Jane Street, Hudson River, and Citadel, though spots for top quant dev roles are highly competitive.
 • Brand strength is valuable for pivoting later into non-quant leadership roles.

For someone set on quant dev, MSFM usually means faster readiness and tighter recruiter alignment, while MFin wins if flexibility beyond core quant is equally important.

For more details you can read this blog on "MIT MFin"


upvote icon
Upvote6
Comment
0
Share