Talk:Quantitative analyst

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Having a PhD in statistics with a minor in math, having taught math and statistics at five different universities, I've never heard the term except here. I suspect it may have currency among business people, so that it should be labeled as business jargon rather than either "maths" (which would be appropriate if mathematicians or statisticians used the word quant). Those same business people who decided to use the term rocket scientist to refer to those who apply sophisticated mathematics to the financial markets are mathematical ignoramuses who don't know that, for example numerical is nowhere near synonymous with mathematical. Michael Hardy 00:50, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

... and now I have moved this article. Michael Hardy 00:50, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I moved it again and re-wrote the article. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 16:46, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Whatever else happens to this stub, I have to say I find the phrase "Within the industry, such workers are universally known" jarring. If the term is used only within the industry, why use the word "universally?" It's kind of like saying, "Only among people in Rhode Island, everyone in the whole world believes that ..." Slrubenstein

It is a legitimate bit of verbiage [1]. It would also be legitimate to say "Rhode Islanders universally agree that they live in a pretty small state" for "All Rhode Islanders agree that they live in a pretty small state." But I changed it anyway, no point in jarring people unnecessarily. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 17:00, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. I didn't mean the question the validity of the word, just its use in this context. I like your change and think it reads much better now. Slrubenstein

Being a quant myself, and a PhD in Physics - I kinda like the word. And its usage IS ubiquitous in the Financial industry. To seal this discussion, read the "Uber-quant" Emanuel Derman's autobiography "My Life as a Quant". VSreekantan

what do u have to do to become a quant?

The external links at the bottom of this article: many of them are links to headhunters with their self-described claims of being THE places to go to for jobs. I think their shouldn't be advertising at the bottom of Wikipedia entries. Can one delete those references? Is there any point since the advertisers who put them there will simply put them back again.

Opinions?

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../q/u/a/Talk%7EQuantitative_analyst_051e.html"