<p>I just started grad school in international development, but I'm thinking I made the wrong mistake, i tried to have it easy in college, so i ran away from math, which meant no engineering.
I did take calculus 1 because it was a requirement, and I got a 3.5 (out of 4 point scale), then got a 3.5 in stats, which does not say much of my math skills, but I still regret that, because I think I want to have a desk job or cubicle work where I do calculations and run models, basically a data analyst , market or financial analyst kind of job.</p>
<p>So which one gives me better options, actuarial science (bachelor), statistics (masters) or masters in financial engineering (I would have to transfer for this one since it is not offered at my current school).</p>
<p>I do realize I may have to take calc 2 and maybe cal 3, and some stats classes or even programming courses in python, java, and c++(for financial engineering) just to qualify for these programs, but I graduated early, so I'm only 21 which according to my dad (who pays my tuition, I owe him a lot) is still young enough to do things over.
Also, grades don't matter to me, I know calc is going to be hard, but I'm a hard worker, the worst that can happen is that I just enough to pass the course.</p>
<p>oh you’re going to have to go WAY deeper for stats and financial engineering. try calc 2, 3, linear algebra, differential equations, stochastic processes, real analysis, etc.</p>
<p>Also, Calc I and intro stats are a cakewalk compared to a lot of the other math you’ll have to do for financial engineering. If you’re interested in that field, you’ve got to take a lot of math. If you think you’re going to struggle with something like Calc II, FE may not be right for you.</p>
<p>If you’re interested in a desk job that has modeling in it, you may want to also look into investment banking or management consulting. It tends to be a lot friendlier to non-science majors than the quant positions you would get with financial engineering.</p>
<p>As far as actuarial work, I would suggest taking the P exam. You’ll get a good refresher for stats and calc, and if you feel good about it, I would continue looking at other exams. From the people who I’ve talked to in that industry, exam results are more important than school or major.</p>
<p>thanks for the input. I’m guessing that FE and Actuary are more specialized, so is statistics the better option, if I take programming classes in addition to my stats requirement, would it open more doors for me. For instance I could work for the government and help research or design experiments, or for a private firm doing market research and even work as an investment banker since I have a bachelors in economics so I know a bit about money and finance.</p>
<p>also, another question is, even if I’m not a genius, if I study my calc and stats classes everyday, will I be able to do well in my classes based on the fact that I work hard.</p>
<p>No. Math at higher levels is something that just isn’t something you can grind out with a lot of hard work. Most students who were taking Real Analysis with me were studying anywhere from 15-20 hours a week, and some were still failing. I hate to be the one to say it, but math is NOT for just anyone. You have to work hard, put in the hours learning theory/proofs, and also be lucky/gifted enough to learn new concepts quickly.</p>
<p>You can get away without real analysis for most stats programs. Finish the calculus sequence + linear algebra and take a few more stats classes. You should be able to get into at least a mediocre program. </p>
<p>On another note, the actuarial science masters programs only teach you the material needed to pass the exams. They are looked down upon by most employers and they are not useful for real analytical training.</p>