r***e
发帖数: 1840 | 1 有机会从coding quant跳去做validation,到底跳还是不跳？广求建议。 |
f****i
发帖数: 201 | 2 coding quant is? validation is pure bo and you dont have to know what
that model is really trying to do |
r***e
发帖数: 1840 | 3 coding quant = read the spec, implement it, need to do the dirty job as well
, like fixing some bugs.
Really? I thought validation guys get more involved to the financial stuffs. |
f****i
发帖数: 201 | 4
well
stuffs.
at least at my place those validation guys also deal with operation risk
models which has nothing to do with the market
【在 r***e 的大作中提到】
: coding quant = read the spec, implement it, need to do the dirty job as well
: , like fixing some bugs.
: Really? I thought validation guys get more involved to the financial stuffs.
|
r***e
发帖数: 1840 | 5 So validation group do get more exposed to financial stuffs? Just think if
it's a good move for me. |
Y******u
发帖数: 1912 | 6
well
stuffs.
if "spec" is model spec, you are quant. if not, you are not. There is no
such thing called coding quant or non-coding quant.
if you are in sell-side and belong to IT division, probably good move to
model validation. Otherwise it doesn't make sense. Buy-side varies case by
case.
【在 r***e 的大作中提到】
: coding quant = read the spec, implement it, need to do the dirty job as well
: , like fixing some bugs.
: Really? I thought validation guys get more involved to the financial stuffs.
|
s*******0
发帖数: 3461 | 7 coding quant 和 developer 的区别？ |
r***e
发帖数: 1840 | 8 That's what I'm thinking. Jumping from one to another in the same division
doesn't change that much.
But the benefit is that I'll get rid of the code totally, more oriented to
finance.
As I work with the code, I can't get the model spec all day long. Like
sometime I need to fix a bug like "Why a default bond still pays coupons".
But in validation, almost all the tasks are related to model.
【在 Y******u 的大作中提到】
:
: well
: stuffs.
: if "spec" is model spec, you are quant. if not, you are not. There is no
: such thing called coding quant or non-coding quant.
: if you are in sell-side and belong to IT division, probably good move to
: model validation. Otherwise it doesn't make sense. Buy-side varies case by
: case.
|
x********o
发帖数: 519 | 9 if you made your decision, then go for it
but I think you will regret
【在 r***e 的大作中提到】
: That's what I'm thinking. Jumping from one to another in the same division
: doesn't change that much.
: But the benefit is that I'll get rid of the code totally, more oriented to
: finance.
: As I work with the code, I can't get the model spec all day long. Like
: sometime I need to fix a bug like "Why a default bond still pays coupons".
: But in validation, almost all the tasks are related to model.
|
r***e
发帖数: 1840 | 10 I didn't decide anything. There's still a long way to go. |
p********n
发帖数: 1707 | 11 whether a validation job is interesting depends on the culture of the group.
Is the person in charge very strong in modeling? What are the background of
the members in the group?
The inventor of the copula formula, David Li, started in a model validation
for CIBC. |
r***e
发帖数: 1840 | 12 Pepper John,
Good point. I think it's very strong in modeling. In my memory, CIBC
is a so so bank. Perhaps my memory is so out of date. lol |
s******e
发帖数: 1751 | 13 validation
"The inventor of the copula formula" is not a good thing on the street.
group.
of
validation |
