A lot of jobs I have seen recently say a PhD is highly desirable while a Masters is essential. Obviously I don't suggest people start doing a PhD for the money, however I'm surprised to think that you can't out-earn your alternative self with a Masters seeing as the difference in study time is 2 years but you'd be entering industry as an 'expert'. Especially if you target your PhD at something like computational finance, autonomous vehicles, etc.
I'd lump those fields into "ML" and the difference is probably more like 4 years in the US (2 vs ~6).
The career consequences are also weirdly mixed. Some places seem to recognize that, along with your area of specialization, getting a PhD also involves a fair amount of project management, writing, etc skills. Other places (or even different people at the same place), seem to think it's a glaring red flag that you can't "get real work done" because you sit around all day in a smoking jacket, thinking. (I think that's mostly bunk--academia moves fast these days, but that sentiment is nevertheless not uncommon).
And, if anyone has actual advice on monetizing a comp/neuro PhD, I'm all ears :-)
Job requirements are often inflated to scare away people without the ambition, egomania, and/or self confidence that the writer of the description desires. The business/management job description equivalent of this is "MBA from top-ten business school essential."
