actuarial vs. finance (1 Viewer)

[sikeveo]

QED Salary survey from last year found the average for Actuarial graduates to be 55k. This year it would be around the same.

I haven't heard of anyone accepting less than 50k this year. The big 4 are paying Actuarial grads ~60k. Finity Consulting is paying 67-70k. Actuarials going into IB are getting even more.

I don't think any actuarial grad would touch 40k with a 10 ft stick.

What you say means nothing without some proof. I think the thing is, how many acturial grads get jobs as acturial analysts not as some other finance related role. The FIAA site said ppl without part 1 get around 35k per year.

further up like at towers perrin tillinghast where some dudes get like 700 an hour

Doubt that. That is ~$1 300 000 per year.

 

[turtleface]

Doubt that. That is ~$1 300 000 per year.

well well perfoming equity partners from Big Four charge about $700-$1000 ph depending on the dept and earn about $500-600 of that so it seems reasonable. That equates to about the $1-1.5million equity partners earn a year

I'm sure a partner at an (Edit: Actuarial) consulting firm gets about the same

 

[:: ck ::]

What you say means nothing without some proof. I think the thing is, how many acturial grads get jobs as acturial analysts not as some other finance related role. The FIAA site said ppl without part 1 get around 35k per year.

Doubt that. That is ~$1 300 000 per year.

go search up the qed site, ive read some of their articles recently so i can vouch for that

'people without part 1 get around 35k per year'

errr did u relaly mean to say part 1? because thats not suprising lol considering thats the first step to being an actuary

 

[Wolfowitz]

In-dia.
Sorry, I'm using the curry pronounciation.

Hey, let's see who's laughing at who when you get pwn'd by pc programs and dirty foreigners. HA irony.

 

[§eraphim]

In-dia.
Sorry, I'm using the curry pronounciation.

Hey, let's see who's laughing at who when you get pwn'd by pc programs and dirty foreigners. HA irony.

Note: This reply is not because of Wolfowitz's ignorance and lack of mathematical ability but to address the more interesting issue of outsourcing of analytical work.

The main barrier to any significant kind of outsourcing of actuarial work is because of:

- lack of experience and local knowledge
- lack of qualified actuaries

To the best of my knowledge, any significant actuarial work needs to be signed off by the Approved Actuary, a fully qualified actuary with lots of experience. These calculations depend on using software approved by actuaries, and that's why the software developers are actually actuaries too, not IT people. eg Classic Solutions

In summary, the professional qualification prevents actuarial labour market arbitrage at the moment. As far as I know, there are very few qualified actuaries, and those that are training/working are doing so to develop products for their own market. Also, many lack the experience and background as a large proportion are IT guys sitting the exams externally.

 

[turtleface]

I was just looking at an Indian actuary site, starting actuaries get about AUD 20K and fully qualified get about AUD 40K

 

[RIZAL]

Sikeveo I found proof:

Attached is the 2004 QED Salary Survey. Average for grads with parts 1 and 2 in 2004 is 49k-55k.

Note that these are 2004 figures. People securing jobs now will be on 2007 salaries!

As a conservative rough guide:

49k accumulated @ 4% (salary growth + inflation etc) for 3 years = 55k
55k accumulated @ 4% for 3 years = 62k

Averages for grads with part 1s only in 2004 is 44k-50k. This translates to 50-56k when converted to future values (2007 figures).

Given around half students finish after part 1s and half after part 2s, this supports my figure of 55k average.

 

[RIZAL]

Shuter,

Queensland and Western Australia white collar workes recorded salary growth rates of 5.1% and 5% respectively in 005-2006. Couldn't find NSW figures but I think you can be sure that they would be much greater than 3%.

(http://www.theadvertiser.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,19224471%5E5003680,00.html)

Next please?

 

[RIZAL]

Those are booming areas compared to the mature economies of Sydney and Melbourne (the places where most accuraries would be hired), and white collar workers is far too broad to apply to acturaries (which the point being raised was: we're training too many of them/it's being offsourced overseas now).

Whether you are in Sydney or Melbourne it's generally accepted that 3% salary growth would NOT be moderate (as you stated).


"Salary growth: This is assumed to be 3.75% nominal, which is consistent with both recent and long term outcomes." - http://www.superannuation.asn.au/calculator/rpm.cfm?page=assumptions

"Assuming that ... the salary growth was 1.5 per cent per year above inflation" - http://www.pss.gov.au/pss/factsheets/psf21.htm

Actuaries would have performed as well as white collar averages. We have seen strong growth in superannuation and the overall financial services sector.

3 or 4 % is much of a muchness though - the underlying message is that Actuarial grads are making more than other grads on average.


Nice attempt at a troll though!

 

[turtleface]

Salary growth for actuaries would be more like 2-3%

The high financial service growth rates are affected by M&A staff due to the booming economy, and also good old accountants especially audit/compliance/technical which has increased about close to 7% every year for the last few years

3 or 4 % is much of a muchness though - the underlying message is that Actuarial grads are making more than other grads on average.

Maybe, but noone does Actuarial studies to get money or a high paying job. 2 words: Investment Banking.

 

[ND]

Salary growth for actuaries would be more like 2-3%

Where did you get this from? The figures quoted by RIZAL are actual salaries from those firms - he didn't just pull them out of his ass (and i don't think that the same thing can be said for your 2-3%).

Maybe, but noone does Actuarial studies to get money or a high paying job. 2 words: Investment Banking.

I think you'll find that actuarial grads are paid more per hour than IB grads. Are you saying that the actuarial profession doesn't pay well?

 

[Omnidragon]

No offence ... but imho, all the salaries are horrendous after tax. If money is your driver, head overseas and save up for a few years.

 

[turtleface]

Where did you get this from? The figures quoted by RIZAL are actual salaries from those firms - he didn't just pull them out of his ass (and i don't think that the same thing can be said for your 2-3%).

yeah i pulled them out of my arse, but only cause I saw this list a while ago that listed the top 10 salary growths by occupation, and no. 10 was 3.2% and actuary was not on the list. and what figures are these? sif firms publish their salary bands. anyway i'll stop guessing and talking crap
EDIT: I found that document lol I never realised it was there sorry!

I think you'll find that actuarial grads are paid more per hour than IB grads. Are you saying that the actuarial profession doesn't pay well?

yes but I get paid more per hour at safeway than IB grads lol (nah exaggerating). Do u propose I continue working at Safeway?, and, no not really theres millions of higher paying jobs that don't require you to become a FIAA. being an actuary would be passable, it seems too boring to me, but a lot of people like it, and if thats your thing, cool...but i doubt heaps of people do it for the money unless they are like some friends of mine who got taken in my high school rumours of allegedly high salaries

No offence ... but imho, all the salaries are horrendous after tax. If money is your driver, head overseas and save up for a few years.

lol
yeah australia's a joke compared to overseas, but the lifestyles ok in aus, not that i have anything to coompare it with, i'll prob have to put up with shitehole salary

 

[:: ck ::]

yeah i pulled them out of my arse, but only cause I saw this list a while ago that listed the top 10 salary growths by occupation, and no. 10 was 3.2% and actuary was not on the list. and what figures are these? sif firms publish their salary bands. anyway i'll stop guessing and talking crap

by the way we're talking about grad jobs here

u cant compare ur 'survey' u saw which is [what i gather] accounting for all professions - graduate or non graduate...

 

[ND]

yeah i pulled them out of my arse, but only cause I saw this list a while ago that listed the top 10 salary growths by occupation, and no. 10 was 3.2% and actuary was not on the list. and what figures are these? sif firms publish their salary bands. anyway i'll stop guessing and talking crap
EDIT: I found that document lol I never realised it was there sorry!

No, firms don't publish their salaries - they do however tell people who they employ how much they are going to pay them (and these people do often tell their friends).

yes but I get paid more per hour at safeway than IB grads lol (nah exaggerating). Do u propose I continue working at Safeway?, and, no not really theres millions of higher paying jobs that don't require you to become a FIAA. being an actuary would be passable, it seems too boring to me, but a lot of people like it, and if thats your thing, cool...but i doubt heaps of people do it for the money unless they are like some friends of mine who got taken in my high school rumours of allegedly high salaries

You implied that IBers get payed much more than actuaries, then admitted that they get paid crap all? (yes, obviously the pay is great at VP/MD level, but it's not easy to make it to that level)

Millions of jobs paying higher than actuarial? Of course there are a few, but to say that actuaries don't receive high salaries is rediculous.

New qualifiers receive $106,000 p.a. on average (and this was in 2005 so it's significantly higher), and the expected rate of increase is $10k-$12k p.a. for the first 5 years (after which the person's performance plays too great a role in the salary to accurately model it).

Also, it's pretty funny that an accounting student is saying that actuarial studies would be too boring for them. :rofl: (no offence intended to accounting students in general)

 

[Omnidragon]

lol
yeah australia's a joke compared to overseas, but the lifestyles ok in aus, not that i have anything to coompare it with, i'll prob have to put up with shitehole salary

Yea... Australia's a pretty good country to live in. But the taxes tick me off a bit... From what I know, our pre-tax figure is around the same as other countries if not lower. Once Yen and Yuan grow... these taxes are going to tick me off more.

 

[turtleface]

You implied that IBers get payed much more than actuaries, then admitted that they get paid crap all? (yes, obviously the pay is great at VP/MD level, but it's not easy to make it to that level)

sorry I meant banking per hour its crap, but its very good overall

Millions of jobs paying higher than actuarial? Of course there are a few, but to say that actuaries don't receive high salaries is rediculous.

New qualifiers receive $106,000 p.a. on average (and this was in 2005 so it's significantly higher), and the expected rate of increase is $10k-$12k p.a. for the first 5 years (after which the person's performance plays too great a role in the salary to accurately model it).

Also, it's pretty funny that an accounting student is saying that actuarial studies would be too boring for them. :rofl: (no offence intended to accounting students in general)

ooh...that accounting jibe's is going to start a new round of pro accounting propaganda from me. Before I start, I'd like to apologise in advance for my views, but they are my honest views, but I'll keep an open mind if your disagree with them and would be glad to hear any arguments against, but here goes:

In 2005, the Senior Manager Salary at Big 4 = 115K+, and requires at the very least 6 years of service to reach. This would be an average salary figure because it is more than

Compare that to Actuaries. In 2005, as stated in the quote, a newly qualified Actuary earns about $106,000. Correct me if I'm wrong, but for an average, reasonable person it requires at least 5 years of post grad study to become a FIAA due to the onerous requirements and difficulty of the exams, as well as an Honours degree in Actuarial Studies, making it roughly equivalent to the time required to become a Senior Manager in Accounting (about 6 years post grad).

115K>106K

Why would anyone want to do Actuarial studies to earn higher salaries, unless they generally like it?

As for Accounting vs. Actuarial Studies in terms of boringness, Accountants do a lot of varied work such as Insolvency administrations, ERP System Implementation. Hey, the FBI sets a MINIMUM no. of Accountants (about 15-20%) to be recruited for its Special Agent Intake, so if you want to be a FBI agent, do Accounting.

To me, I can't see Actuaries do anything beyond number crunching. I'm going to be really controversial/a troll here and claim that many Actuaries work for Accountants.
Accountants demand their services to work out the values of Insurance Provisions and Contingent Liabilities. Actuary = Accountant's slave. LOL its probably true but I'm just joking, sorry, couldn't resist.

 

[Omnidragon]

Just wondering... you counted bonuses in your hourly rates?

Also, how many hours per week are you using for both professions?

 

[turtleface]

sorry me or ND?

Personally, although I know this makes me look like an ass cause it contradicts what I said before: Including bonuses, IBankers still get more per hour than actuaries. But who am I kidding with my opinions, I admit that I only base my opinions on salary surveys, and I doubt high earners would feel any need to submit their salary figures to surveys.

 

[ND]

In 2005, the Senior Manager Salary at Big 4 = 115K+, and requires at the very least 6 years of service to reach. This would be an average salary figure because it is more than

Compare that to Actuaries. In 2005, as stated in the quote, a newly qualified Actuary earns about $106,000. Correct me if I'm wrong, but for an average, reasonable person it requires at least 5 years of post grad study to become a FIAA due to the onerous requirements and difficulty of the exams, as well as an Honours degree in Actuarial Studies, making it roughly equivalent to the time required to become a Senior Manager in Accounting (about 6 years post grad).

I doubt that the average time from graduation until FIAA is 5 years (i have no figures on this but considering you only need to pass 4 exams and you can take up to 2 per semester, it's very unlikely that the expected time taken is 5 years). Also, what proportion of accounting grads become a Senior Manager in 5 years?

As for Accounting vs. Actuarial Studies in terms of boringness, Accountants do a lot of varied work such as Insolvency administrations, ERP System Implementation. Hey, the FBI sets a MINIMUM no. of Accountants (about 15-20%) to be recruited for its Special Agent Intake, so if you want to be a FBI agent, do Accounting.

Firstly, you don't think that Actuaries do varied work? If you are working at a consultancy you can be doing a number of different projects at any one time. Also, actuarial work would be far more mentally challenging than accounting work (and therefore more interesting). Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that actuarial work is exciting, but as i said before it's pretty funny coming from an accounting student.

To me, I can't see Actuaries do anything beyond number crunching. I'm going to be really controversial/a troll here and claim that many Actuaries work for Accountants.
Accountants demand their services to work out the values of Insurance Provisions and Contingent Liabilities. Actuary = Accountant's slave. LOL its probably true but I'm just joking, sorry, couldn't resist.

That's like saying that any service provider is the slave of the client. I guess you consider all I-Banks and the Big4 to be the bitches of the corporate world.

Just wondering... you counted bonuses in your hourly rates?

Also, how many hours per week are you using for both professions?

Assume 60hrs/week for actuarial and 90 for IB (very conservative estimates). This means that for the $/hour to be equal, the bonus for IB grads must be 50% (assuming same base salary). I doubt that it would be that high very often.

Personally, although I know this makes me look like an ass cause it contradicts what I said before: Including bonuses, IBankers still get more per hour than actuaries. But who am I kidding with my opinions, I admit that I only base my opinions on salary surveys, and I doubt high earners would feel any need to submit their salary figures to surveys.

You're definately right about the first part.