Madison
I started at Madison and was immediately thrown into the deep end – I was given an endless stream of work; but not busy work – real, meaningful responsibilities. I could talk for hours about what I worked on and learned. However, the 0.01% off-chance someone is reading this makes me hesitant to share any details about the work I did at Madison. Though there may be a legal element to my continued confidentiality (I signed documents that said I can’t share anything about the work I do there while I am there; after leaving seems fuzzier – I didn’t read the fine print), I more so just have respect for the people I worked with. Some of the other posts on this blog may give you some hints as to the work I did. That’s not the focus of this post.
At a high level, here are some things I acquired from my time at Madison:
-
Pre-Madison, I thought hedge funds had some mystical edge that immediately gave them superiority over retail investors: maybe a tool, alt data, borderline insider tips. But really, they don’t – aside from a greater network and access to management, the “edge” is just hard work, creativity, and attention to detail: a lot of reading (not skimming… reading), googling, and cold-calls. In my mind, with a large enough time investment, a retail investor should be able to mirror the resources of a hedge fund. The delta between what a retail investor and hedge fund has does not constitute the tools for beating the market. More generally, I’ve realized most things that seem mystical and impossible to achieve from the outside are just propped up by a lot of hard work. The implication: spend less time making excuses and more time on the grind.
-
I made a lot of mistakes at Madison, the largest of which stemmed from a lack of attention to detail. Some of these mistakes were large enough that they could constitute reason to fire me – luckily that didn’t happen. I initially tried to improve by checking over details multiple times before producing a final product, but realized this doesn’t really work. A better approach is to wait and look at your work with a fresh set of eyes. Leave all assumptions at the door and view from the end user’s perspective (whether the end user is your MP or another programmer).
Having attended TJ (a prestigious STEM school in Northern Virginia; very intense), I have a higher breaking point under pressure than most – this was tested at Madison. I would pull regular all-nighters and stay in the office until midnight at times.
Optiver
Don’t really feel like sharing too many specifics about what I did at Optiver, but I did not receive a return offer. I’m more interested in diving into why and what I could’ve done better:
-
Clear lack of attention to detail: Similar to Madison, I struggled with attention to detail initially. I think at Madison, I had a long time to correct my mistakes (I interned there for 4.5 months), whereas at Optiver, a slipup towards the beginning of the internship could still be fatal by the end given a) the internship is only 10 weeks long and b) return offers are based on ranking interns and quotas not on individual growth over time (Madison felt more the latter w/ no stringent quotas given the small team size). I think my lack of attention to detail stemmed from 1) a lack of preparation – I went immediately from Madison (where I spent 0 out of 4.5 months coding or thinking about coding concepts) to Optiver (where I was expected to be in peak “software engineer” form right out of the gate) and 2) a lack of programming ability and general knowledge – I just wasn’t as good a programmer as I needed to be to succeed!
-
Lack of mild autism/obsession: For the first half of the internship, I just wasn’t sufficiently “obsessed” with my work – I didn’t immerse myself into my team’s goals and projects and even think about trying to go above and beyond. I was overly focused on getting my day-to-day tasks complete, and not much more. That extra “oomph” is usually necessary for securing a return offer, and I just don’t think I had it, likely due to exhaustion in dealing with my own day-to-day tasks!
I had a couple more items I could put on the above list, but honestly, I think they all likely stem from what I’ve already listed.
Recruiting Season part 2: 10x Harder
I originally was going to talk about this, and I think it’s probably what most readers would have been interested in. How did I go from dead in the water with no return offers (a little bit more complex re: Madison – have discussed that in another previous post) to securing a NG SWE position with Old Mission, undoubtedly one of the most prestigious quant firms to work at, in the most recruiting environment over the past decade?
Unfortunately, I don’t really feel like talking about that right now. I started writing this post like a month ago and am picking back up in late July. It’s the day before I start at Old Mission, so I want to jot down some thoughts re: that.
Starting at Old Mission:
My anxiety stems from the following: if I couldn’t get a return offer from Optiver, how can I survive at Old Mission?
First, a few quick thoughts on the worst-case scenario:
-
Old Mission has a 12-month rotation program where new grads work 3 months on 4 different teams.
-
It seems unlikely they would fire any new grad in <3 months before they complete their first rotation.
-
There’s a reasonable chance an under-performing new grad gets fired in 3-9 months (say 40%, primarily thinking about the 6-month mark)
-
There’s a high chance an underperformer gets fired 1y out.
If I am a serial underperformer, the expected time of my firing is ~10 mo. That’s not terrible! It seems to sufficiently compensate for sunk costs from my apartment. It also means if I do get fired, I am probably not cut out for quant (and at that point, I should be in a place to accept it rather than wallow in grief).
Okay, with that out of the way, let’s discuss why I think I can perform average to well at Old Mission:
-
I have been preparing, and I do feel at least near peak form as a programmer. Contrast this to effectively negative prep pre-Optiver.
-
I feel like my attention to detail has improved – the code I write now feels much higher quality than it was one year ago.
- Looking at code I wrote in the semester before I went to Madison, I feel this is the case.
-
I think my programming and CS knowledge has improved significantly.
Together, I think this list suffices in suggesting I have what it takes to do well at Old Mission.
P.S.:
Reader –
This is probably one of the shittiest posts I’ve written. Sorry about that. Maybe it’s the lack of focus on writing/anxiety I have given I start work tomorrow, or maybe I’ve just seriously degraded in my writing abilities. Hopefully this post doesn’t make you stop reading. I’ll try to improve in the next one 😐