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

Takeaways from the Jane Street bond prospectus

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 343 posts

Re: Takeaways from the Jane Street bond prospectus

#61

Post by [deleted] »

SkipperCat wrote: post #52
chronic830021 wrote: post #17

> Double the profit per employee than Google > Average TC of 900K > Several unranked billionaires it makes even OpenAI / Meta ML SWEs look underpaid

SWE will probably make between 250-500k. Quants who can come up with profitable trading strategies can make a lot more. Managers of trading teams can make over 1MM and sometime a lot over 1MM depending on how profitable their teams perform. SWE who have deep subject matter experience are super valuable to these firms. Folks who understand how to write low latency code, FPGA work and other stuff like that. But the rea…

[deleted]

Re: Takeaways from the Jane Street bond prospectus

#62

Post by basil-rash »

chronic830021 wrote: post #39
yodsanklai wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the average, it'd be interesting to know what's the median for a SWE is. Also, some high-level SWE do make 900K at Google and others. Maybe for a similar set of skills, JS doesn't pay (much) more than Meta or Google?

> This is the average, it'd be interesting to know what's the median for a SWE is. 900k is average including janitors and HR. Median for SWE most definitely over $1 million. Turnover of 6%? No way people stick around “only” making 500-600k new grad comp. Check levels.fyi > Also, some high-level SWE do make 900K at Google and others And some high-level SWEs at JS make 9 figures, not 900k.

Janitorial staff is almost certainly subcontracted.

Re: Takeaways from the Jane Street bond prospectus

#63

Post by mayguo »

SkipperCat wrote: post #52
chronic830021 wrote: post #17

> Double the profit per employee than Google > Average TC of 900K > Several unranked billionaires it makes even OpenAI / Meta ML SWEs look underpaid

SWE will probably make between 250-500k. Quants who can come up with profitable trading strategies can make a lot more. Managers of trading teams can make over 1MM and sometime a lot over 1MM depending on how profitable their teams perform. SWE who have deep subject matter experience are super valuable to these firms. Folks who understand how to write low latency code, FPGA work and other stuff like that. But the rea…

> SWE will probably make between 250-500k.

New grad SWE is 400K

https://www.levels.fyi/companies/jane-street/salaries/softwa...

And levels.fyi not very accurate because 2nd year bonus is much larger than 1st year bonus in offer letter.

Quants/traders can hit $1M with 5 YOE not too difficult. Portfolio managers (similar to EM in tech) definitely $1M, sometimes $10M.

Re: Takeaways from the Jane Street bond prospectus

#64

Post by cess11 »

sgt wrote: post #49

Whenever OCaml stories popped up about Jane Street, I always figured they were about 30-40 employees by now. 2613 people?!

I imagine most of those use the tools built by their developers, and do a lot of paper shuffling and analytical work supported by the software.

Re: Takeaways from the Jane Street bond prospectus

#65

Post by dorfsmay »

llm_trw wrote: post #25
belinder wrote: post #20

Why do they say 179,000 million instead of 179 billion? Is that common in their industry?

Why do we say 17,000 kilometers instead of 17 megameters?

Most people prefer habits/conventions over logic.

I've had people get angry when I tried to use Mm (mega metre) or ask why using some currencies symbols before the number when all symbols for all other units are used after.

Re: Takeaways from the Jane Street bond prospectus

#66

Post by jfrbfbreudh »

SkipperCat wrote: post #52
chronic830021 wrote: post #17

> Double the profit per employee than Google > Average TC of 900K > Several unranked billionaires it makes even OpenAI / Meta ML SWEs look underpaid

SWE will probably make between 250-500k. Quants who can come up with profitable trading strategies can make a lot more. Managers of trading teams can make over 1MM and sometime a lot over 1MM depending on how profitable their teams perform. SWE who have deep subject matter experience are super valuable to these firms. Folks who understand how to write low latency code, FPGA work and other stuff like that. But the rea…

I work at a competing firm and our SWE new grads make $420-470k (including signing bonus).

JS pays their new grads similarly, just a tiny bit lower.

Re: Takeaways from the Jane Street bond prospectus

#67

Post by [deleted] »

Galanwe wrote: post #48
vintermann wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, sometimes they only do stuff that should be illegal. Superfast arbitrage, which is Jane Street's main thing as far as I understand, doesn't really produce anything of value to humanity. Yeah, I guess the contributions to OCaml are worth something, but maybe not 10 billion?

You don't make 10B returns on HFT alone. The characteristics of short prediction horizon strategies like in HFT give you an amazing sharpe, but you're predicting small returns. To scale returns you need to invest more, which means higher market impact, which means longer prediction horizon, on larger price moves.

[deleted]

Re: Takeaways from the Jane Street bond prospectus

#68

Post by chii »

dchftcs wrote: post #47
llm_trw wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That works out to 8 million per person on average. I'd be interested to see if the Pareto distribution holds here as well, namely that 1% of employees (26) hold half the wealth ($10b).

It probably includes the founding partners, so it might be that ~0.15% hold more than half.

only 1 founding partner is still there apparently (from the article). Rob Granieri

Re: Takeaways from the Jane Street bond prospectus

#69

Post by AnimalMuppet »

lambdaxyzw wrote: post #43
flipbrad wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Billion has wildly different meanings. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billion

I disagree, as a native speaker of a language where "bilion" means 10^12, it's clear to me that "billion" means 10^9 when used in English text. So I disagree that is ambiguous. But maybe that's wiem that way to make sure foreigners with poor understanding of English don't read it incorrectly, because I guess it gets confusing (even journalists sometimes make a mistake of translating that wrong).

"Billion" meant 10^12 in England until... some time in the 1950s, I think? But 10^9 in the USA.

So there was confusion, even in the English-speaking world. Was. If I understand correctly, England has adopted 10^9, and so now there is no ambiguity.

Re: Takeaways from the Jane Street bond prospectus

#70

Post by walthamstow »

mort96 wrote: post #37
llm_trw wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do we say 17,000 kilometers instead of 17 megameters?

I want us to start using megameters. And gigameters. And instead of (metric) tons, I want megagrams. No kilotons; gigagrams.

Brewers introduced me to this with hectolitres
Post reply on HN