Actuarial Studies - right path for me? (1 Viewer)

[dvse]

Another problem with many degree programs is that they spend alot of time justifying their existence and professing their importance.

Indeed, marketing that various departments engage in is outright dishonest and students have pertty much no way of seeing through the spin.

 

[wrong_turn]

Actuarial studies has essentially no maths in the modern sense (not even linear algebra!) and introduces an assortment of poorly explained topics from statistics (time series, brownian motion, discrete markov processes, GLM etc).

HSC program has no bearing on "maths" as it is understood today either and is nothing but meaningless busywork (is there even a single proof?). Curriculum has long been hijacked by "education professionals".

dude read my post carefully. i said that actuarial is "not" maths in the sense that it does not touch up on 3u or 4u maths. meaning it has barely any relationship in work material to hsc maths (i.e. stuff you do in 3u or 4u maths in hsc will not be fully utilized in actuarial).
err or were you just agreeing with me??

but from my friends doing the major, logic is to understand, and if not, there is always memorising the answers and hoping for the best in the exams =P

 

[dvse]

dude read my post carefully. i said that actuarial is "not" maths in the sense that it does not touch up on 3u or 4u maths. meaning it has barely any relationship in work material to hsc maths (i.e. stuff you do in 3u or 4u maths in hsc will not be fully utilized in actuarial).
err or were you just agreeing with me??

but from my friends doing the major, logic is to understand, and if not, there is always memorising the answers and hoping for the best in the exams =P

I'm saying that neither HSC 4U nor actuarial studies has much bearing on modern mathematics. To get some feel for the ideology and methods of modern mathematics one should study something along the lines of the following program:

Harvard Mathematics Department : Graduate Information

 

[Azamakumar]

your logical deduction is required in solving these problems, though they may be very statistics based and will require a large knowledge in financial maths (i.e. time value of money)

Have you done math1081? You'd completely rethink that post if you have. Imo actuarial is more recognising which formula to use then applying it, not so much thinking about ways to assess problem.

 

[wrong_turn]

haha yeh i try to run away from maths when i can =P so no azamakumar, i have not done math1081, especially since it has math in the course code

i have never done actuarial but from those who have done it and especially when they also an economics and finance major in their double degree.

and dvse, isnt that meant to be graduate entry into mathematics?? =S

what you guys also have to recognise is that the point of actuary is not to do pure maths.

"Actuarial science includes a number of interrelating subjects, including probability and statistics, finance, and economics." -wikipedia =P

im not saying you are wrong, but merely stating that it is not meant to be all maths, but its meant to be using the logic of how maths is meant to be done.

 

[Azamakumar]

i have never done actuarial but from those who have done it and especially when they also an economics and finance major in their double degree.

I take discrete maths and a first year finance sub with a friend doing actuary. The boring NPV stuff we do in fins is exactly what they do in actuary. Completely different ball game to math1081. In fins they give you a bunch of numbers and ask for a calculation, or arbitrary decision on the result of that calculation. In discrete you're given an idea and asked to prove it. They might give you a push in the right direction, but for the most part the creative thinking is up to you.

Personally find fins shit boring atm.

what you guys also have to recognise is that the point of actuary is not to do pure maths.

Common misconeption that most people taking it fail to realise until they've invested themselves in it. More or less the point of this thread though.

 

[wrong_turn]

@Azamakumar: your first point of the arbitrary substitution of numbers makes me cringe. this is why i feel like ive been wasting my time with finance. its so pointless.

 

[dvse]

@Azamakumar: your first point of the arbitrary substitution of numbers makes me cringe. this is why i feel like ive been wasting my time with finance. its so pointless.

Absolutely. Plus most of finance "theory" they teach in undergrad becomes self evident if you have the right maths background. For example "APT" is just a trivial statement that for a linear map L:X->Y any y in Y either belongs to Im(L) or its orthogonal complement or that Im(L) is a linear subspace of Y.

 

[wrong_turn]

haha this is why im trying to make some sort of uniqueness by doing some psychology with my economics and finance majors. it might have been worthwhile maybe doing more econometric courses for my economics major.

 

[testingexample]

What ATAR mark do you need to do Actuarial Studies?

 

[Pwnage101]

around 95 for MQ, UNSW and ANU i believe

 

[kickass91]

do actuaries have the opportunity to move into the corporate sector i.e. business management.

or do they pretty much remain in consultancy


ALSO, would doing an actuarial/accounting or actuarial/finance or actuarial/ econometrics double major help with a career as an actuary.
And would work experience as an accountant in the big four help with anything at all ? ( from a cadetship) Could it help you secure a transfer to the actuarial department and would they support you in gaining the full qualifications from the Institute of Actuaries Australia?

 

[Trebla]

If you have a strong interest in mathematics as a field and want to do commerce, do something like Financial Mathematics, Statistics or Applied Mathematics from a science degree (perhaps combined with Finance). Maths in a science degree really lets you explore the beauty of mathematics as opposed to an actuarial degree.

In the real world no one cares what degree you end up with, as long as you have the skills they are looking for. In investment banks for example, they look for people from a diversity of backgrounds including commerce, engineering, law, maths and physics (yes that's right, even people with a physics major are desired in banking!) simply because they tend to have the quantitative and analytical skills they are looking for.

I'm not sure about actuarial studies but most commerce faculties do NOT provide rigorous mathematical proofs to back up the models they use simply because it will freak the crap out of any non-maths people.

For example, in my Corporate Finance unit (from commerce) we basically got told, "CAPM looks like this etc etc" or "here's the formula for PV of an annuity" without even acknowledging that it came from a geometric series. In my opinion, it's pretty much "here's the formula, drill some numbers in it".

However in Financial Mathematics (from science) we actually derived the equations for CAPM from first principles to get the model using vectors, statistical and matrix theory which I found much more interesting and enhanced my understanding in terms of how to use it.

 

[kickass91]

do the subjects u learn with a degree majoring in financial mathematics/quantitative risk/statistics from a B Sc gain you exemptions from the actuarial exams? Or are they in any way related, like you would have less material to learn afresh, should you decide to make a switch to the actuarial profession?

also is it true that if u do a Masters or PhD in financial mathematics/quantitative finance (whatever its called) and you do very well in them, you would pass the actuary exams comfortably?

 

[dvse]

also is it true that if u do a Masters or PhD in financial mathematics/quantitative finance (whatever its called) and you do very well in them, you would pass the actuary exams comfortably?

IMO you will still need to study/revise because of the low pass rates, and the more maths you learn the more retarded/irrelevant the actuarial curriculum will appear - so you will likely no longer want to subject yourself to it.

 

[§eraphim]

Developing skills are more important than knowledge for business as you could very well be on the forefront when it comes to products and pricing - the ability to learn new things quickly and to take a practical approach is important.

Also, all the major breakthroughs in financial mathematics of late have come from some kind of industry collaboration - all the good stuff is kept in the banks. Only when its usefulness is nought do you ever see the good stuff being published. Academia will aways be behind the curve. For example, the story on the GS trading systems being leaked probably contains a myriad of discoveries on market microstructure theory.

I think it would be similar in other industries where protecting trade secrets is important, eg Boeing, Lockheed Martin, NASA, etc

 

[dvse]

Developing skills are more important than knowledge for business as you could very well be on the forefront when it comes to products and pricing - the ability to learn new things quickly and to take a practical approach is important.

Also, all the major breakthroughs in financial mathematics of late have come from some kind of industry collaboration - all the good stuff is kept in the banks. <...>

I think it would be similar in other industries where protecting trade secrets is important, eg Boeing, Lockheed Martin, NASA, etc

No doubt this is true, but those "trade secrets" almost never represent any genuine conceptual breakthroughs so probably not too hard to rediscover most of them if they are really needed.

But the above advice is definitely good - what is important is an intuitive grasp of fundamentals and underlying maths plus an ability to reason sensibly about new problems.

 

[§eraphim]

But the above advice is definitely good - what is important is an intuitive grasp of fundamentals and underlying maths plus an ability to reason sensibly about new problems.

Trust me, all the maths you need to know on an exotics desk is probably up to second year calculus and linear algebra,eg Taylor Series for sensitivity analysis, maybe multidimensional Newton's method for calibration routines, (according Luc Faucheux, former head of Citi rates exotics). The rest is details for the quants to handle - knowing it can take you away from the heart of the problem I've found.

Problem with mathematicians is that they love the details....Despite coming from this background, I like the physics way of doing things...much more intuitive

 

[dvse]

Trust me, all the maths you need to know on an exotics desk is probably up to second year calculus and linear algebra,eg Taylor Series for sensitivity analysis, maybe multidimensional Newton's method for calibration routines, (according Luc Faucheux, former head of Citi rates exotics). The rest is details for the quants to handle - knowing it can take you away from the heart of the problem I've found.

I think what you are talking about is physical or geometric intuition - if so, I definitely agree.

 

[Affinity]

Trust me, all the maths you need to know on an exotics desk is probably up to second year calculus and linear algebra,eg Taylor Series for sensitivity analysis, maybe multidimensional Newton's method for calibration routines, (according Luc Faucheux, former head of Citi rates exotics). The rest is details for the quants to handle - knowing it can take you away from the heart of the problem I've found.

Problem with mathematicians is that they love the details....Despite coming from this background, I like the physics way of doing things...much more intuitive

the devil's in the details