Last minute decision! UCLA applied math VS UCSB actuarial science

I had already SIR UCSB, am I still be able to SIR UCLA? I would like to be actuary in the future. However, I only accepted by UCLA’s applied math. Wondering which school would be better for me? And is it possible to change my major into financial actuarial science in UCLA before the first semester?

If I were you I would pick UCLA simply because if you end up liking a different side of applied math, you can find a different career. Majoring in actuarial science is pretty narrow. I applied with the goal of becoming an actuary, but I applied as a Statistics major to allow for a more open ended career, because an actuarial career is based on the actuary exams, as i’m sure you know. My vote goes to UCLA, but go check out both and see which you fit in better.

@sega18 Could you help me out?

I agree with naregian. Actuary is a pretty narrow as field. You are mostly restricted to working for insurance companies and some consulting companies (big 4). A broad major like math or stats will have more opportunities and becoming an actuary will still be on the table for them. How you network will honestly make a bigger difference than choosing a particular major or school.

Another thing to consider is that most actuary jobs are actually located in the Midwest and NorthEast (if you didn’t know). You have to willing to move if you are really dedicated to this career path.

http://www.beanactuary.org/what/work/?fa=jobs-by-region

Applied Math at UCLA is indeed more versatile for a career, but are you willing to accept having the majority of your courses deal with theoretical math instead of the applied content you seem to be looking for? (The likely GPA drop as well?)

A lot of people don’t realize how removed theoretical math is from the computational and practical math they learned in the lower division courses.

Compare the curriculum:

https://www.math.ucla.edu/ugrad/majors/applied-mathematics-major
http://catalog.registrar.ucla.edu/uclacatalog2015-16-455.htm
http://catalog.registrar.ucla.edu/uclacatalog2015-16-739.htm

vs.

http://www.pstat.ucsb.edu/instruction/Actuarial-Science-BS-2015.pdf
https://my.sa.ucsb.edu/catalog/Current/CollegesDepartments/ls-intro/stats.aspx?DeptTab=Courses
https://my.sa.ucsb.edu/catalog/Current/CollegesDepartments/ls-intro/econ.aspx?DeptTab=Courses

UCLA won’t offer any outright economics courses and your only exposure to financial mathematics are your four upper division electives which are the same as the Financial / Actuarial majors (Math 170-174). Your core classes (Math 115, 131, 142) are based on theoretical analysis rather than financial modeling. VEE courses will be an issue and a lot of extracurricular studying will probably be needed to prepare for the actuary tests.

UCSB on the other hand requires you to take the traditional financial mathematics courses needed (PSTAT 170-172) as core classes and leaves your electives open for whatever specialty your looking for. Depending on your class choice, you could meet the vast majority of your VEE requirements and could be in good shape for the P, FM, and MFE exams without a need for outside study.

It’s a case of versatile degree vs. versatile curriculum. UCLA should be a favorite, but UCSB has it’s merits if you made up your mind about pursing a career in finance.