Quantitative v. Qualitative
I jumped into the discussion of quantitative finance with someone that has the highest skills in telling everyone about his advanced degree seemingly while acknowledging the very ignorance that keeps him in bliss. Must be a painful existence.
Quantitative finance absolutely helps, but by itself and you hope to compete in an industry sector of the deepest pockets. I'm going to make an assumption here though. I think it's over competitive for the very human nature of ego. All the high dollar students that put heart and soul into quantitative extrapolations yet all of them lack core market reasoning that's only learned trading. Now all of them needing to compete to be the smartest and you have an industry that misses the bigger picture.
Now I'm not the smartest but I know what works and what doesn't from a competitive side of architecture. There were times I'd spend 25K a month on colocated servers, cross connects, media adapters and the arbitrary convenience fee.
While I think quants actually serve a purpose no doubt, they lack the core experience of qualitative methods that extrapolate the best conditions. It's just not part of the 'I'm smarter attitude'. It's the why "would I look at that?". The core understanding is a discussion that took place decades ago before the internet started serving charts to kids without real world experience.
My point. Include the granular micro-structure. That is sufficient focus for those not colocated but include the qualitative (best of the best) side of market dynamics. The quantitative side will give you the core influences where you can recognize them and the qualitative side will keep you connected and well grounded to common sense and logic.
I jumped into the discussion of quantitative finance with someone that has the highest skills in telling everyone about his advanced degree seemingly while acknowledging the very ignorance that keeps him in bliss. Must be a painful existence.
Quantitative finance absolutely helps, but by itself and you hope to compete in an industry sector of the deepest pockets. I'm going to make an assumption here though. I think it's over competitive for the very human nature of ego. All the high dollar students that put heart and soul into quantitative extrapolations yet all of them lack core market reasoning that's only learned trading. Now all of them needing to compete to be the smartest and you have an industry that misses the bigger picture.
Now I'm not the smartest but I know what works and what doesn't from a competitive side of architecture. There were times I'd spend 25K a month on colocated servers, cross connects, media adapters and the arbitrary convenience fee.
While I think quants actually serve a purpose no doubt, they lack the core experience of qualitative methods that extrapolate the best conditions. It's just not part of the 'I'm smarter attitude'. It's the why "would I look at that?". The core understanding is a discussion that took place decades ago before the internet started serving charts to kids without real world experience.
My point. Include the granular micro-structure. That is sufficient focus for those not colocated but include the qualitative (best of the best) side of market dynamics. The quantitative side will give you the core influences where you can recognize them and the qualitative side will keep you connected and well grounded to common sense and logic.