Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What the interns have wrought, 2020 edition

blog.janestreet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 219 posts

Re: What the interns have wrought, 2020 edition

#31

Post by lowiqengineer »

fractionalhare wrote: post #19
davidu wrote: post #4

For those who don't know, Jane Street is one of the best performing algorithmic trading firms on Wall Street. Probably the largest Ocaml shop on earth. It's a lucrative job for strong programming talent. Engineers there routinely make well over $1mm/year (edit: after a few years). They are similar to Two Sigma in tech focus and talent, which is a more well-known firm.

"Routinely" is doing a lot of heavy lifting. I can confirm it's possible, as I've been in the industry and have spoken to people who make seven figures at Jane Street. But I would rather say it's "reasonably attainable" for an engineer who has been there for at least five - seven years and is really hitting their stride with the type of work. They do routinely beat out top tech compensation, and most engineers there…

This comment really did not help my depression as someone that makes $150k two years into a FAANG job. I've never even been able to get interviews from HRT or Jane Street, and my Citadel offer was less than $200k...

Re: What the interns have wrought, 2020 edition

#32

Post by rtlfe »

fractionalhare wrote: post #19
davidu wrote: post #4

For those who don't know, Jane Street is one of the best performing algorithmic trading firms on Wall Street. Probably the largest Ocaml shop on earth. It's a lucrative job for strong programming talent. Engineers there routinely make well over $1mm/year (edit: after a few years). They are similar to Two Sigma in tech focus and talent, which is a more well-known firm.

"Routinely" is doing a lot of heavy lifting. I can confirm it's possible, as I've been in the industry and have spoken to people who make seven figures at Jane Street. But I would rather say it's "reasonably attainable" for an engineer who has been there for at least five - seven years and is really hitting their stride with the type of work. They do routinely beat out top tech compensation, and most engineers there…

> Either you're good enough to maintain at least that level of comp, and you stay, or you're out within a year or two.

Tech companies have explicit up-or-out policies for lower-level engineers. I don't think the top trading firms do any more firing of new grads than FANG does.

Re: What the interns have wrought, 2020 edition

#33

Post by jrott »

geodel wrote: post #26
polote wrote: post #3

Let me know if I'm wrong, but it seems like Jane Street is going contrary to the HN common belief that a lot of things should be "buy" instead of "build" and yet they are quite successful

I do not know if it is very difficult to understand. Next food/ clothing delivery startup with a webpage and mobile app : Buy. Cutting edge Wall street firm : Build.

Even if you want to make it complex it's if it is core to your business and provides competitive advantage build otherwise buy.

Re: What the interns have wrought, 2020 edition

#34

Post by jkaptur »

johnisgood wrote: post #7
polote wrote: post #3

Let me know if I'm wrong, but it seems like Jane Street is going contrary to the HN common belief that a lot of things should be "buy" instead of "build" and yet they are quite successful

Yep, and they use OCaml! I always feel like I have to point it out since people do not think much of it, have lots of misconceptions of it, and so on.

I guess I might have some misconceptions of OCaml. Are there other companies that use it? I ask because whenever someone says "OCaml is used in industry, for example, Jane Street", they say it like it's just one example, but it's always Jane Street.

Re: What the interns have wrought, 2020 edition

#35

Post by fractionalhare »

lowiqengineer wrote: post #31
fractionalhare wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Routinely" is doing a lot of heavy lifting. I can confirm it's possible, as I've been in the industry and have spoken to people who make seven figures at Jane Street. But I would rather say it's "reasonably attainable" for an engineer who has been there for at least five - seven years and is really hitting their stride with the type of work. They do routinely beat out top tech compensation, and most engineers there…

This comment really did not help my depression as someone that makes $150k two years into a FAANG job. I've never even been able to get interviews from HRT or Jane Street, and my Citadel offer was less than $200k...

Comparison is the thief of joy. You are more than your work, and I would say you'll always be unhappy if you define your identity or your success by how much money you earn. Someone around you will always earn more than you, or have some other successful characteristic that you do not.

That being said: while it's not perfectly meritocratic, I would say tech and (this side of) finance is uniquely attainable for someone who has the determination and tenacity to build the requisite skills. You don't need to have gone to a particular school. Barring a felony, your past choices in life will not hold you back.

If you already got into one of FAANG, you almost certainly have a strong baseline skillset already. If it's really important to you, focus on achieving further mastery of your craft and figure out what you need to do to pass an interview at this kind of firm.

Re: What the interns have wrought, 2020 edition

#36

Post by twic »

fractionalhare wrote: post #29
maest wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's rarely the case that Technology sees those kinds of bonuses; that's most common on the Investment side. And yes, even places like Jane Street separate between Investement and Tech.

In HFT (and often stat arb) the front and back office dichotomy doesn't apply as much. Basically anyone doing nontrivial engineering work has an opportunity to share in the profits of the firm at Jane Street. They don't need to be a quantitative researcher or trader.

Are you stating this from specific knowledge of Jane Street?

The division in trading firms, IMLE, is between front office (making and executing trading decisions) and back office (book-keeping, accounting, risk control, compliance, administration, etc). Both sides have technical and financial people. But only front office - both technical and financial - is likely to get wild bonuses from doing good trades. Back office bonuses are more about doing the job well.

If Jane Street is sharing some of the trading profit with back office staff, good on them.

Re: What the interns have wrought, 2020 edition

#38

Post by angio »

jkaptur wrote: post #34
johnisgood wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, and they use OCaml! I always feel like I have to point it out since people do not think much of it, have lots of misconceptions of it, and so on.

I guess I might have some misconceptions of OCaml. Are there other companies that use it? I ask because whenever someone says "OCaml is used in industry, for example, Jane Street", they say it like it's just one example, but it's always Jane Street.

The OCaml website lists some companies it [0], I think there are a bunch of new blockchain startups that are also using OCaml but are not on that page.

[0] https://ocaml.org/learn/companies.html

Re: What the interns have wrought, 2020 edition

#39

Post by fractionalhare »

twic wrote: post #36
fractionalhare wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In HFT (and often stat arb) the front and back office dichotomy doesn't apply as much. Basically anyone doing nontrivial engineering work has an opportunity to share in the profits of the firm at Jane Street. They don't need to be a quantitative researcher or trader.

Are you stating this from specific knowledge of Jane Street? The division in trading firms, IMLE, is between front office (making and executing trading decisions) and back office (book-keeping, accounting, risk control, compliance, administration, etc). Both sides have technical and financial people. But only front office - both technical and financial - is likely to get wild bonuses from doing good trades. Back offi…

I am, yes. I'm more familiar with their researchers, but I know (or have spoken to) people across different functions there. They have security engineers who earn over $1M/year (for one example of something which isn't usually "front office"). For Jane Street it's about impact: if you substantially improve something at the firm, you share in the spoils.

That doesn't mean literally everyone who works there is rich, and the quants will do better relatively speaking. But in the sense of engineers being second class citizens: no, I wouldn't say that's the case at all.

Post reply on HN