Bank quant vs buy-side quant: pay, stability, regulation, and moving between them

"Quant" is one word covering two quite different jobs. At a bank, a quant usually builds and maintains the models a trading desk prices and risk-manages with, or checks someone else's models on behalf of the regulator. At a hedge fund or trading firm, a quant is more often paid to find and run strategies that make money directly. Same maths, different relationship to the P&L, and that difference drives almost everything else: pay shape, job security, how much of your week is governance, and how easy it is to switch sides.

Last reviewed 2026-10-04. Every figure below carries its year, location, and source type: official (a firm's job ad or careers page, or a regulator), reported (press), or self-reported (Levels.fyi, Blind).

What bank quants actually do

The banks' own job ads show how wide the range is, even inside one bank.

• Front-office pricing and modelling. JPMorgan's Quantitative Trading & Research (QTR) group advertised a New York associate role in equity derivatives exotics in August 2026, focused on "derivative pricing and lifecycle models" and "exotic risk management". An energy VP posting from September 2026 says the team "builds the valuation models, analytical tools, and risk infrastructure behind J.P. Morgan's global Energy trading business". (Official, JPMorgan job ads, 2026.)
• XVA and counterparty risk. A 2026 QTR posting asks for someone to "design and develop models/analytics for pricing and management of XVA, Margin and Counterparty Credit Risk", partnering with XVA trading. (Official, 2026.)
• Model validation. A September 2026 JPMorgan Model Risk ad lists duties such as validating "risk models used in connection with regulatory capital measurement as well as market risk management" and evaluating "conceptual soundness of model specification". (Official, 2026.)
• Strats. Goldman Sachs files its quantitative strategists under Engineering and says they work "in close collaboration with bankers, traders and portfolio managers", and that "you may work on alpha generating strategies; discuss portfolio allocation problems; and build models for prediction, pricing, trading automation, data analysis and more." (Official, Goldman Sachs careers page, accessed 2026.)
• Electronic trading. This is where banks look most like the buy side. JPMorgan's e-Markets QTR team posted an associate role in September 2026 on a "cross-asset ETF team that focuses on systematic trading and market making", describing the initiative as being at "a very early stage". eFinancialCareers reported in September 2026 that Goldman Sachs is hiring C++ engineers for a new electronic market-making business line in ETFs, an area it had largely exited in 2017 before returning as a lead market maker on a Capital Group ETF in 2025. (Official and reported, 2026.)

What buy-side quants do

At hedge funds and trading firms, the quant seat sits closer to the money. eFinancialCareers puts it this way: banks employ quants "to write easily explainable models" for their trading books because "financial services regulators demand that these models can be easily understood", while quant traders "analyse data from a variety of sources and use it to create a trading strategy". (Reported, July 2026.)

Candidates say the same thing more bluntly. In a 2020 Blind thread on sell-side versus buy-side quant work, a poster tagged to Susquehanna described sell-side quant positions as "more like [a] supporting role for traders" (with algo desks as an exception), against HFT and quant shops where "quant dominate strategy design & development". (Self-reported, Blind, August 2020.)

Team size differs too. Connor White, formerly of Citadel, said on a podcast quoted by eFinancialCareers that banks often have "five people doing [the] role" of a single hedge fund quant developer. (Reported, September 2025.)

Pay: what the published numbers show

Banks and buy-side firms now print base salary ranges on many US job ads. These are the hardest numbers available, but they are base only.

Two things stand out. First, inside a bank, model validation and front-office pricing ranges overlap heavily on base. Second, D.E. Shaw's published base for its Quantitative Analyst role, which targets "the top students" from technical programs ($275,000 for BS/MS, $300,000 for PhD), is above JPMorgan's posted associate range ($150,000 to $200,000). The BS/MS figure sits near the top of the VP range ($285,000) and the PhD figure is above it, even though the JPMorgan roles ask for prior experience (the Quantitative Research ad, for example, asks for a master's degree plus two years). D.E. Shaw's ad adds "substantial variable compensation in the form of a year-end bonus, guaranteed in the first year of hire". (Official, 2026.) Our D.E. Shaw guide covers that firm's process.

The bigger gap is in total compensation, where the evidence is self-reported and noisier:

• Levels.fyi, US, as of October 2026: JPMorgan quantitative researcher median total comp $205,000 (94 submissions), with the VP level at $262,000 ($197,000 base, $51,800 bonus); Goldman Sachs quantitative researcher median $158,000 and quant developer median $165,000 (52 submissions); Citadel quantitative researcher median $625,000 (29 submissions). (Self-reported, 2026.) Small samples and different seniority mixes, so read these as orders of magnitude.
• eFinancialCareers, 2025: quant developer executive directors at JPMorgan in New York on salaries of up to $350,000, and Citi paying "algo developers" up to $260,000. For newly hired quant developers at hedge funds, Balyasny's head of quant research put total compensation at $250,000 to $400,000. (Reported, September 2025.) The comparison is uneven: the bank figures are senior-level base salaries, the hedge fund range is entry-level total pay.
• Recruiter view, 2022: "There's a reason your base salary is $200k when you earn, say, $600k total per year," recruiter Peter Wagner of Affinity North wrote in a newsletter quoted by eFinancialCareers, about hedge fund quant developer pay. (Reported, October 2022.)

In the self-reported Levels.fyi data, bank quant bonuses are mostly a fraction of base (JPMorgan VP: $51,800 on $197,000; Goldman Sachs quantitative researcher VP higher, at $107,000 on $181,000), while buy-side packages lean more on bonus, which can exceed base and can also shrink. That pattern rests on a handful of data points, so hold it loosely. We unpack bonus mechanics in how quant bonuses work.

Stability: two different kinds of risk

Bank quant roles still face restructuring, but much of the work is anchored by regulation. US banking guidance treats model validation and "effective challenge" as sound practice for larger banks. The April 2026 guidance defines effective challenge as critical analysis "by objective experts" with "sufficient independence to maintain objectivity, as well as the organizational standing and influence to effect any change." (Official, Federal Reserve, OCC and FDIC, SR 26-2, April 2026.) That makes demand for validation less tied to any single year's trading results.

Buy-side risk is more personal and more tied to performance. Career guide Mergers & Inquisitions says of multi-manager funds that "it's easy to get fired because there is no tolerance for losses (even small ones)" and that compensation "depends almost 100% on your team's performance". (Third-party guide, undated.) That applies most to portfolio-manager teams at pod shops; centralized quant funds and trading firms structure risk differently, as covered in pod shops vs centralized funds.

The trade-off also cuts both ways. A UBS model validation quant on Blind in 2021 reported $180,000 total comp after four years and "10hrs/week work hours", called the job "(read boring)", complained of "no job growth, low pay", and wanted out. (Self-reported, Blind, October 2021.) Stability and engagement do not always come together.

Regulation shapes the bank seat

Much of a bank quant's week is defined by rules the buy side does not face in the same form:

• Model risk management. In April 2026 the Federal Reserve, OCC and FDIC issued revised guidance that "supersedes and replaces" SR 11-7, the model risk guidance issued in April 2011. It emphasizes a "risk-based approach to model risk management that is tailored to a banking organization's model risk profile", and the Fed says it is most relevant to banking organizations with over $30 billion in total assets. Generative and agentic AI models are explicitly outside its scope. (Official, SR 26-2, April 17, 2026.) If you read older advice citing SR 11-7, note that it has been replaced.
• Capital rules. A 2026 JPMorgan London posting describes FRTB (the Fundamental Review of the Trading Book) as "a significant evolution in market risk capital rules", with work on both the internal models and standardized approaches. (Official, 2026.)
• Bonus rules. In the UK, the banker bonus cap was removed in 2023, and from 16 October 2025 the minimum deferral for material risk takers fell to four years, with more cash allowed upfront. The quantitative test for material risk takers is being within the top 0.3% of earners at a firm, a threshold most junior quants will not meet. (Official, Bank of England, October 2025; law firm Lewis Silkin, October 2025.)

Moving between them

Bank to buy side is the more commonly discussed direction. eFinancialCareers notes that "banking quants may therefore want to seek exit opportunities to hedge funds and trading firms. There, careers are a bit less linear and more performance-based." (Reported, July 2026.) Goldman strats asking Blind about moves to Millennium (May 2023) and D.E. Shaw (July 2025) are examples of the path. (Self-reported.)

What helps, according to candidates: proximity to trading. A 2022 Blind reply to a bank quant choosing between quant developer and pricing roles advised "whichever one gives you the most exposure to the desk and the actual strategies is best." (Self-reported, July 2022.) By that logic, front-office pricing, electronic trading and systematic desk roles are the easier launch points; validation and governance roles are further from the strategies.

Non-competes are the main friction, and the sources cited here describe them mainly at trading firms and hedge funds. eFinancialCareers reports that trading firms "demand that you spend a period out of the market" and that these "can reach as much as three years, if you're senior." (Reported, July 2026.) Bloomberg reported in January 2025 that Citadel extended non-competes for some portfolio managers to 21 months, with rivals' policies "closer to 12 months". (Reported, January 2025.) That can make a second buy-side move slower than the first. Our guide to switching quant firms covers garden leave in more detail.

The legal picture as of 2026-10-04:

• United States (federal): the FTC says its non-compete rule "is not in effect and it is not enforceable", after a court blocked it in August 2024 and the FTC moved to dismiss its appeal in September 2025; in February 2026 it removed the rule from the Code of Federal Regulations. State law still governs. (Official, FTC.)
• United Kingdom: non-competes are "unenforceable, unless the employer can demonstrate it is reasonable". The government's working paper on reform (published November 2025, last updated February 2026) set out options including a three-month cap or a ban; no legislation had been passed as of that update. (Official, GOV.UK.)

Not legal advice: check your own contract and local law before relying on any of this.

Buy side to bank is less documented publicly. Bank model-risk ads do accept prior experience as a "Quantitative Analyst, or related occupation". (Official, JPMorgan, 2026.)

How to choose

• Choose a bank seat if you want deep derivatives and risk expertise, a base-heavy package, and a job anchored by regulation. Prefer roles close to a desk if you may want to move later.
• Choose the buy side if you want your pay and career tied directly to research or trading results, and you are comfortable with more variance and longer restrictive covenants.

Whichever side you target, our problem bank has probability, statistics, stochastic processes and options questions to practice on.

QuantReady is an independent prep platform and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs, D.E. Shaw, Citadel, or any other firm named here. All trademarks belong to their respective owners. Nothing here is legal or tax advice. If something is out of date or wrong, tell us via /contact and we will review it against the sourcing standard above.

QuantReady is an independent prep platform and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by any firm we write about. All company names and trademarks belong to their respective owners. Read how we source our content.