Can a mathematician make a living out of statistics and probability?

What I mean is putting very dedicated effort into exploiting the financial system. I don't necessarily mean getting rich, but I'd work day and night to be independent though this method.

As a NEET, I already study full time graduate Springer textbooks with great success. Why not putting this interest into solving real life problems and make some bucks?

Can this be done? Second point: I lack any knowledge about finance and economics since I've never been exposed to it. Where do I start with some books useful for this purpose?

"Computational finance in C#" is a pretty nice book.

>Being this naive and delusional.

Thank you for the reference.
Care to elaborate? You're saying it's almost impossible to make a living out of this? Hard to believe.

>putting this interest into solving real life problems and make some bucks.

It's called a job.

Yeah, but I want to work for myself.

Play with algo trading until you're broke.

BUMP

get a real job lol

No. Statistics and probability won't do anything to help you with investing unless you also study a good deal of finance/economics. If you want to be a quant, then you'll need to be PhD in math/stats level.

>unless you also study a good deal of finance/economics
Suppose I do that. Is it still doable to make money or the chances are so low it's not even worth trying?

>Implying you're superior because you're a wageslave.
>Implying what you do is more "real".
Nice delusion.

>i read gtm with great success

>PhD for quant

Bullshit. Fuck off with your face. You can easily be a quant with a BA and lots of experience or an MSci, but you definitely don't NEED a PhD

You won't make money, honestly. You would only be able to do equities because you need a fuckload of capital to invest in fixed income. Basically, if you get lucky, you'll make money, but probably not otherwise.

Have you ever been to a quan shop? They specifically pick up people with graduate degrees in mathematics, often PhDs.

> you can easily be a quant with a BA

You can call yourself a quant, sure, but you won't be able to get a job doing it. On top of that, the BA is generally math for people who aren't really good at math (only exception I can think of is Princeton where every degree is a BA). Strictly speaking, you may not need a PhD, but you almost certainly won't be able to get the job without.

Let's think about this from a financial perspective. You're essentially asking whether it's possible for you to find and capitalize on arbitrage opportunities in the market. However, you are competing against tens of thousands of other people who have vastly more resources to devote, as well as more informative sources of information. It stands to reason that any opportunity you could hope to find would already have been found and exploited by someone else-that is unless you have reason to believe you have some some special technique or knowledge unique to you (and don't say "graduate level statistics").

>As a NEET, I already study full time graduate Springer textbooks with great success
Oh you mean you never went to university and don't have any credentials?

Probability Theory and Statistics only come into play when you're dealing with millions of dollars and complex derivatives. It won't be of any use with your $230 dollars invested through robinhood.

If you mean algo trading then no. The market is efficient.

If you mean getting a job in finance using statistics and probability then yes.

I absolutely get your point. The idea is that those companies go for the highest and safest profit possible so there's something left for someone who wants to work on it a bit more.

>unless you have reason to believe you have some some special technique or knowledge unique to you (and don't say "graduate level statistics").
There's nothing wrong it graduate level statistics. Measure theory, probability, markov chains, etc... there are a lot of good books and that's something I'd surely have in common with a quant or whatever.

I was up for 24 h "yesterday" and today I slept for 6 so I'm not new to heavy cognitive load.

People do not behave 100% logically, the market always has untapped opportunities.

this is a mistake in terminology.

these days the term "quant" has been diluted such that anyone working in a bank implementing software or working for a quantitative trading frm often gets called or calls themselves a quant.

the term's true meaning is to refer to the PhDs and postdocs who typically came from science and engineering and mathematics backgrounds into banks and other financial institutions in a big wave in the 80s and continuing in the 90s.

so that's what the word "quant" refers to when used by people who know what it means and are using it formally.

No single individual behaves logically 100% of the time, but given a large enough sample size we actually do. Please read up some on this topic before opening your mouth.

>but given a large enough sample size we actually do

WEW LAD, is it logical to accelerate the rate of limited resources depletion (predictable isn't logical)?