Mathematics vs Statistics

B

Black Swan

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2026
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
I am considering either a masters degree in mathematics or statistics. I was wondering if some of you quantatively oriented individuals could expound on the differences between the two feilds (I’ve always viewed them as somewhat similar) as well as the types of jobs either could lead to within the finance realm and their general usefulness or lack thereof. Lets not get side tracked into PhD vs MS territory please. Thanks in advance for all your help.
 
Er, Statistics is a subset of Mathematics. As far as Master’s degrees go, Statistics is more useful for finance, since it is often directly applicable to financial market problems. “Mathematics” degrees, in contrast are often abstract and their material is for mostly academic purposes.
If you are looking at these sorts of courses for their finance career applications, I suggest that you consider Master’s in Financial Engineering or Financial Mathematics programs as well. Banks and other financial institutions recruit actively from these programs.
 
Depends on what you want to do.
Time Series Analysis (which you’d find in a Stats program) would be useful for quantitative trading.
Partial Differential Equations & Stochastic Calculus on the other hand (Math) are important in asset pricing.
 
cfagoal2 Wrote:
——————————————————-
> Mathematics is like MBA
> Statistics is like CFA
MBA & CFA should not even be mentioned in the same sentence as either Math or Stats.
(BTW - LOL @ the “stats” material in the CFA)
 
Pixel Wrote:
——————————————————-
> cfagoal2 Wrote:
> ————————————————–
> —–
> > Mathematics is like MBA
> > Statistics is like CFA
>
>
> MBA & CFA should not even be mentioned in the same
> sentence as either Math or Stats.
>
> (BTW - LOL @ the “stats” material in the CFA)
youre a wild man Pixel
 
Black Swan Wrote:
——————————————————-
> I am considering either a masters degree in
> mathematics or statistics. I was wondering if
> some of you quantatively oriented individuals
> could expound on the differences between the two
> feilds (I’ve always viewed them as somewhat
> similar) as well as the types of jobs either could
> lead to within the finance realm and their general
> usefulness or lack thereof. Lets not get side
> tracked into PhD vs MS territory please. Thanks
> in advance for all your help.
Can tell you one thing most mathematicians snicker @ statistics as a subdiscipline for some very goood reason ….that is not to say that statistics doesnt have some useful theories but jus that most statistician have allowed the field to be manipulated and massaged to yield whatever desirable answer………………my 2 euros
 
Well, as smart as techie people are, a high % of them end up working for people with MBAs, or who otherwise do not have technical backgrounds. The CEO of the bank I work for makes millions of $s a year, is not a mathematician and has an MBA. Yet, he has legions of quant geniuses working for him.
 
^That’s how it is for every field.
Bill Gates didn’t become the richest person in the world because he was the best at making computers. Hard skills only take you so far.
 
The only upside to statistics is that you get to learn SAS which is pretty useful these days.
As far as mathematics goes then, Numerical Analysis, PDE’s and ODE’s are used in in many areas today. But it all depends on what you want to do, you might just study Operator theory and be of no use at present or study stochastic calculus and find a job easily.
ultimately it boils down to your interests in the subject. I personally find that you can easily understand statistics if you have a maths background.
“There are Lies, damn Lies and statistics”
 
If you’re going back to school, get a math degree. You can learn the statistics you need on your own, you don’t need a degree to learn SAS.
Plus consider what Pixel said about the fields where you intend to work.
 
cfagoal2 Wrote:
——————————————————-
> ^That’s how it is for every field.
>
> Bill Gates didn’t become the richest person in the
> world because he was the best at making computers.
> Hard skills only take you so far.
Steve Ballmer is the billionaire CEO of MS and is a marketer. A MARKETER.
 
pimpineasy Wrote:
——————————————————-
> Can tell you one thing most mathematicians snicker
> @ statistics as a subdiscipline for some very
> goood reason ….that is not to say that
> statistics doesnt have some useful theories but
> jus that most statistician have allowed the field
> to be manipulated and massaged to yield whatever
> desirable answer………………my 2 euros
That seriously makes no sense. “Manipulated”? Everything is based on mathematical theory.
As far as coursework, most of it will overlap anyway. I know many people who have pursued math and others who have pursued statistics. Both groups have done well for themselves but I think there’s more value in statistics from a job perspective. You can also easily get into actuarial science.
 
Plus, you also have to consider that whether you get a Math, or a Stats, graduate degree, for it to translate into a quant career you need to supplement it with C++ expertise.
 
Slash Wrote:
——————————————————-
> pimpineasy Wrote:
> ————————————————–
> —–
>
> > Can tell you one thing most mathematicians
> snicker
> > @ statistics as a subdiscipline for some very
> > goood reason ….that is not to say that
> > statistics doesnt have some useful theories but
> > jus that most statistician have allowed the
> field
> > to be manipulated and massaged to yield
> whatever
> > desirable answer………………my 2 euros
>
> That seriously makes no sense. “Manipulated”?
> Everything is based on mathematical theory.
>
> As far as coursework, most of it will overlap
> anyway. I know many people who have pursued math
> and others who have pursued statistics. Both
> groups have done well for themselves but I think
> there’s more value in statistics from a job
> perspective. You can also easily get into
> actuarial science.
no my point is that numerous court cases and politcal polls have made conclusions based on seemingly sound statistical theory …….the oj case was an example of this ……..
 
you need study stats if you are looking for a way to get knowledge with a wide range of practical applications. some dudes here think stats is just “learning some SAS”. that’s the understatement of the year. where’s JDV the stats phd to key on this? advanced probability theory and statistics is an extremely deep and far-reaching branch of mathematics and most pure math majors even in grad school just scratch the surface and think running a linear regression = stats. their opinion is a joke. pixel is a joke.
some ppl said stochastic calc is needed for a career in math finance, and learn stats on the side. i agree with the first part of the statement but not with the second. study statistics, learn stochasitc calc on the side if you need to and have interest in it. this approach provides a much broader base of knowledge with various applications in many directions, and a concentration in an area of choice such as stochastic calc.
 
If you want to be more pure mathy but still be considered a good statistics guy, then concentrate in “Probability” as a sub-field of mathematics.” You can go both directions depending on a job description after that.
 
Mobius Striptease Wrote:
——————————————————-
> you need study stats if you are looking for a way
> to get knowledge with a wide range of practical
> applications. some dudes here think stats is just
> “learning some SAS”. that’s the understatement of
> the year. where’s JDV the stats phd to key on
> this?
Clearly you don’t understand the difference b/w MS and PhD. I expect that from a d!ck head like you. Secondly, SAS is a big upside to Stats MS, but that does not imply you only learn SAS in stats MS.
 
in what way am i a d!ckhead, moron - because i shared my opinion in response to the question in the thread? what exactly is your point dummy i wasnt even discussing anything with you? you are a joke just like your buddy pixel
 
Mobius Striptease Wrote:
——————————————————-
> in what way am i a d!ckhead, moron - because i
> shared my opinion in response to the question in
> the thread? what exactly is your point dummy i
> wasnt even discussing anything with you? you are a
> joke just like your buddy pixel
Hence Proved.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top