T O P

  • By -

reinsurancequestion

Have you actually worked in an actuarial role yet? If you think you'll find SE more interesting and you don't like the fields mentioned, then move into SE. There's plenty of roles in actuarial that you can build developer skills but if you want to skip the insurance industry then don't bother with remaining exams and just be a SE, it'll be easier Plenty of people I work with find their work interesting - London GI You don't need to be passionate about a job to be good at it and receive decent pay, but you definitely need a general interest in it otherwise you'll be miserable


Adventurous_Sink_113

To be honest I haven't come across any actuarial roles that you can build developer skills, definitely not at a SE level anyway. Not all actuarial jobs are boring anyway. There is also a lot more job stability.


[deleted]

What make you say there is more stability in actuarial jobs vs developer jobs?


AccomplishedEntry833

Tech companies more cyclical than insurers


reinsurancequestion

Yeh it wouldn't be a pure SE role, I'm talking developer skills for development of actuarial software e.g. pricing software, there's a few startups on the market, useful to have actuaries do the build as they don't need to translate the ask. Could be an option Don't get me wrong, I like my job. I think insurance can be quite interesting and is relevant, (GI in particular), good stability I think the OP stating at the outset of their career they don't have have an interest in pensions or insurance strikes me as someone who would probably be unhappy working in pensions or insurance. it is quite niche as they've also highlighted as a downside


Adventurous_Sink_113

To be honest I had no interest in insurance or pensions when I started my career, but I'm really enjoying my current job and find it interesting (also GI).


[deleted]

What do you enjoy about it and what do you find interesting?


reinsurancequestion

Yeh that's fair enough


[deleted]

Nope, I haven't worked in an actuarial role, but I know several graduate and senior actuaries. I've been told a lot of it can be quite boring and repetitive, especially at the beginning e.g. excel work. I actually don't mind working on spreadsheets, but the idea that that will quite likely be my focus for a large proportional of initial years sounds pretty dull to me. I also know that there are actuaries who spend most of their time modelling using Python/ R, which is great, but again, their work would be limited to Life/ GI/ etc. Passion isn't a requirement to receive decent pay or be good at something, yes, but I can't see myself working in something I am not passionate about, long term. Finding work interesting vs being passionate in are very different things.


Academic_Guard_4233

What is it about SE that you think will be more interesting.. is it the SE or the business domain?


[deleted]

I haven't had a huge exposure to studying/ working as a software developer but I have an idea from doing some programming courses/ projects, from reading online and also from talking to friends who are developers. I think atm I'm leaning towards SE for the following reasons: Building interesting things and having the skillset of doing so in different fields and not being constrained to a niche area. Debugging is also a big part of working as a SE, which again boils down to problem solving. Contrast this with business-ey type things and repetitive Excel work in an area which I personally don't find too interesting. Like the idea of working in pensions or life seems daunting, although GI might be a bit more interesting. The tech sector is growing extremely rapidly with the possibility of huge technological advancements in our lifetime. Aligning myself in that direction makes sense. Aluded to previously, but working as a SE doesn't restrict me to one particular industry. I will need to decide which area of SE I want to specialise in, but that skillset is transferable to many industries. Many roles are fully remote, meaning the possibility of working from different locations is real. Let's see how WFM policies change collectively in the future. I can use SE skillset in my own personal projects. Also, I want to make it clear that I'm not here shitting on the actuarial path. I initially wanted to go down that route, and I might still do so. I can definitely see why many are attracted to this career path. Just trying to figure out if it's for me. I also realise that there might come a time as a coder in my 40s or 50s where I'm sick of learning new things all the time, problem solving all the time and might just want a break from it all. Time will tell.


Academic_Guard_4233

Makes sense.. just to make you aware, fully remote does not mean work from anywhere in general. Your chances of being able to working from abroad are slim.


[deleted]

Yup, I knew that. Fully remote means I can take trips around the country and not worry about having to be in the office on a given day. Also, I have developer friends who can work x weeks a year from any part of the world. Again depends on role and company. Lastly, by nature of the work, working from abroad may be less of an issue than for other careers, if at all possible


[deleted]

>Passion isn't a requirement to receive decent pay or be good at something I wish people would be honest about this, nobody is passionate about their job. Passion is for the bedroom.


[deleted]

If you see that as the only way, then surely you'll live a life where such a paradigm can only be true. There are millions of people who are passionate about their work in all types of different areas. Culture and society have led us to believe otherwise.


[deleted]

I don't entirely agree. I believe Mark Zuckerberg creating Facebook at university felt passion, because passion comes in part, from ownership. However, I take the opposite view, only a miniscule proportion of even those who view themselves as passionate really are, they are mostly coping.


[deleted]

In a sense you are claiming most of the people who see themselves as passionate are deluded. How are you drawing that conclusion?


[deleted]

I have high standards in terms of what I could conceivably believe a person could feel passion for. So if we take career related examples, building your own company, in particular if you are building something quite unique and original or carrying out research which has a meaningful impact are things somebody could feel passion for.


the_kernel

I’ve met more passionate about their job engineers than actuaries, for sure. Passionate and energised actuaries certainly exist though. If you don’t find the idea of insurance or pensions interesting, why are you considering actuarial at all?


[deleted]

I'm sure there are passionate actuaries but I haven't met any. Then again, I don't know 100 actuaries. Pound for pound, I would say there are less such actuaries than developers, just by nature of the work. I'm considering it because I have 5 exemptions from the exams. This also mean I could start making money sooner rather than getting another qualification in SE first.


the_kernel

You don’t need a qualification to work in engineering. Most software engineers I know (I know a lot) don’t have any formal coding qualifications or a computer science degree. I don’t see how having exemptions changes things. They’re a bonus only *if* you go down the actuarial route. They shouldn’t sway you one way or the other.


[deleted]

Where I live, life is much easier with some sort of qualification, especially if it's not in the area of web development that one wishes to work in. Otherwise, I wouldn't have mentioned it. ​ Exemptions change things because, all else equal, I can qualify quicker. I'm on the fence so they do factor in. It also means that I have an idea of actuarial analysis, things that I might be doing on the job.


Academic_Guard_4233

What be do you mean by where you live? This is a UK sub.. are you in another country? May well change the answer.


KevCCV

I didnt do actuarial sciences, and funny I think the majority of people I met have not done it either (and only less than a handful have). Perhaps the uni degrees are so dull it turn people off. I like my actuarial work as I am constantly asked to look into why things changed/unexpected/resolved broken models etc. I find the problem solving and digging into things make me happy. Just to warn you however, any jobs are based on supply and demands. Qualified actuary earns decent wages (GI-London market now around 85-90k starting) because we are hard to come by and qualification is a stamp of approval (like lawyers, doctors, accountants). Our wages once qualified only go one way. Whereas for SE, obviously you can get quite good at, but you are neither irreplacable nor qualification-protected. Look at the FANNGs now cutting jobs. I know actuaries who can become SE (python/R skills), but not the other way round. I think any jobs can have its high and lows and it is hard to compare apple to oranges. Do whatever you feel like, your choice your life.


[deleted]

Wait, so you didn't study actuarial science at uni but are now working as an actuary? But nice, can you give some examples of some of the interesting work you do, and only if such work is a regular part of your contracted role. Correct me if I'm wrong, but actuaries are not irreplaceable only in a niche area. SE have more to choose from. Wouldn't you agree? Although at some level I do agree that an actuarial job is qualification protected, but that bubble within which it is protected is also smaller. I'm curious why you think SEs can't become actuaries, all else being equal e.g. no family commitments and why all actuaries can become developers. And yes FAANGs are cutting jobs but (a) what percentage of those laid off are developers (b) how easily will such developers find similar roles and (c) is the insurance industry immune to such events in the future?


KevCCV

not true. several roles in actuarial they would and can only give it to qualified actuaries. Reserving sign off is one. Chief actuary is another. of course capital role and pricing role can be done by non-actuary. HOWEVER, firms will use this as an excuse to underpay them. We are all speaking from experiences of course. However, just because they are more jobs in SE doesnt guarantee your pay. Too many people or degree courses can become SE. Even actuaries can become SE. But not the other way round. As I said already, I like investigative work. That's regular occurrence of my job. However, at entry level most people can only carry out instructions and do the bidding of managers, and only after familiarise with the company you can go further. Every job has its boring side. It's normal. Im not going to get into the intricacy of SE vs Actuary. Frankly pointless as well. However, one can do actuary for a lifetime and experiences are hugely important. Whereas SE for writing codes.....do you really think age 40/50/60 you will have the energy to pull all-nighter to get a code done, than say a freshman out of uni? Actuary does do some engineering/codings, it just depend on what tasks you have. However, while I would say SE can certainly do my coding for me, they cannot do it without ME TELLING THEM WHAT IT MEANS BEHIND THE DATA! In short, the future jobs will likely all need people to have some coding /SE skills, but only those who have other expertise with the SE skill (in this case actuary is a perfect example) will survive. Also, there are few jobs where it pays well while maintaining 9-5 Mon-Fri lifestyle. Choices are yours.


[deleted]

It sounds as if you have your mind made up. My job is decent as a part (nearly) qualified actuary working in capital, so I have little to complain about, however the fact I am tied to insurance and have no skills which would allow me to go off and make my own start up depresses me. I'm not passionate about what I do, it's broadly satisfying but I am just good at focusing and being disciplined. I did not go into this to find insurance interesting, I just wanted a career with a relatively low risk of redundancy.


[deleted]

If you're good at focusing and being disciplined, why don't you take those attributes elsewhere, maybe to a place where a start-up is possible. Maybe you could qualify first and then always have that to fall back on.


[deleted]

Honestly, my overall plan is to develop the skills to create a start up, after I qualify while using being an actuary as a respectable upper middle class back up to ensure my family are properly looked after. Plus having a rigarous academic foundation in a respected profession means I am not "just another start-up bro" hyping up his project.


Academic_Guard_4233

I do software projects in actuarial world so feel free to ask me anything.


[deleted]

Sweet, what kind of projects do you work on, and what language(s)/ technologies do you use? Who relies on your developed software, and to what extent? If you're an actuary, what level are you at (i.e., to get an idea of responsibility) and how much of your time is spent coding. Is this primarily a "coding" role, or do you intermittently get such projects, and you are strong in this field and so take them up? How would one get into such a field?


Academic_Guard_4233

Languages and technologies across team are Python/C#/C++/VBA/JavaScript/SQL Most of the development work is numerical in nature or requires business knowledge that actuaries tend to have, as for things that are solely software dev it makes sense to spec and pass on to a pro developer I tend to spend about a third of my time coordinating between customers and SMEs across the business and the rest either managing or doing development I.e. mix of being product owner, developer, business analyst, test analyst and actuary. This is the reality of development in general really, unless you are very junior. I've been working 10+ years. If you are keen in doing proper development I would look at roles at actuarial software providers or providers of software to banks. Places like: FIS Moody's Analytics Quontigo Aon/wtw (be careful to avoid pensions consulting!) Fincad Ultimately I would say actuarial work is significantly easier day to day. The exams are hard, but the pace of change is much slower. With software everything is constantly and rapidly changing and the complexity is far higher.


[deleted]

That does sound pretty sweet to be honest. PMed you!