You just fired the first shot against the FRM and CAIA apologists.
I would not do the CVA. The CVA is not a hard designation to get. It is a “tack-on” certification for a CPA who already does business valuations.
The CVA is a week-long, really expensive CPE course with a final exam and an ongoing price tag every year. Corporate Development will smile more on a CFA or ASA than on the CVA.
you bet i did 
CAIA and FRM are for the people who can’t pass CFA. Those who passed CFA and then pursue CAIA and FRM are the losers who are insecure and can’t prove themselves at their current job so they keep compiling more and more useless credentials like these.
i agree with you on ASA but it is only for someone who wants to do reporting, compliance, litigation etc., sides of not just business valuations but also for the valuations of other assets. Just for the analytical side of the business valuation, I’d still stick with CVA, as it is more focused and detailed on the business valuatoin front.
@Ashray,
You said above that CMA was a possible substitute for CPA. Then you said:
This is the general consensus that CPA’s have with regards to CMA’s. CMA is for hose who couldn’t qualify for, or couldn’t pass the CPA.
And in fact, most of the “good” corporate accountants that I know (financial reporting managers, controllers, CFO’s) are all CPA’s, and spent a few years at a CPA firm–usually the audit side. I know very few people with the CMA, outside of a couple of college professors. And they both said that if you’re a CPA, then CMA is probably a waste of time. Rather than take the CMA, they advised me that it is better to spend your time networking, doing relevant CPE, or learning on the job.
CMA (and its brethren, the CIMA and CGMA) is very broad (like CFA and CPA) but not very deep, and not very “niche”. Most other accounting designations (like Certified Internal Auditor or Certified Fraud Examiner) are very “niche”, and do have value if (and only if) you work in those areas.
CVA/ABV and CMAP/CM&AA are probably only useful to those who are already doing the job (mostly public accountanting partners) who don’t mind overpaying for CPE, and want to pump up their resume to their clients. This is usually done so they can increase their billing rate, or to convince a judge and jury that they now have “credentials”. Unwary customers don’t realize how little goes into the CVA (and its brethren).
CFA+FSA that should get you ahead of 99%.
FIAA beats you all!
Actuary is harder than anything in finance.
^ This
I don’t think it is impossible to pass all these exams. There is so much overlap across the syllabus that if you “master” one, the rest just require “marginal” studies. Personally, I did PRM (all 4 levels) in June-July 2011, level 1 CAIA in September 2011, level 1 FRM in November 2011, level 1 CFA in December 2011, level 2 FRM in May 2012. Also, during this time I was doing an internship and my final year of undergrad AND I am not from a finance (or even a closely related) field.
I took a hiatus because I ran out of funds to pay for CFA L2. I will be attempting it this June.
If you ask me, I don’t really see the harm in doing them if you can pay for it. All the exams combined cost me like $4,000 maybe. Considering that a full-time degree is much MUCH more expensive, I don’t see why you should not.
Why did I do all these? Because I wanted to make a point. I was in a noname (I’m talking even if you hear about it you won’t be able to pronounce it kind of noname) undergrad college and really, to get anywhere, I wanted to show that it was just because I had a bad year before joining. Since then, I’ve gotten into a prestigious university and have a consultant job at KPMG waiting for me after I graduate.
Edit: @Ashray2: I personally felt that FRM was much more challening than CFA. I felt CFA L1 was pretty easy. FRM made me think. I’m sure the next few levels of CFA will be harder. But I can assure you, FRM is not for “CFA rejects.”
Yeah–but actuarial science is not finance. That’s kinda like comparing apples to DVD’s. They’re both round. Other than that, it doesn’t really make any sense.
Take Level 2, then come back and tell us what you think.
One of the regulars on AF said that they studied a whole eight hours for Level 1. Then they failed Level 2 twice.
A finance graduate with CFA and a actuarial graduate with AIAA or FIAA, ceteris paribus, IB will choose the acutary graduate over finance graduate anyday.
It’s not about the guy who “studied 8 hours for L1 and then failed twice.” I personally feel that CFA is not that difficult. I’m used to remembering entire textbooks because of the sad education system I grew up in. I find MCQs easy. That’s my point. I’m a student. I’m in the “zone.” I’ve been studying finance non-stop for 2 years and that’s why I’m able to pass these exams. I don’t think having an alphabet soup sends a wrong message unless you say, “I’m a CFRMAIAPRM, hire me NAOW.” I just put all the alphabets in small fonts in my CV as if it’s a side-deal.
There’s a lot of misinformation in this thread just from glancing over it. Seems to be a lot of hubris from people who haven’t completed the CFA program. It’s not the first time I’ve seen this stuff, usually either the obvious troll disappears or, if they’re actually enrolled they tend to grow earily silent as they progress through the levels. You passed LI with little effort, congrats, join the club. It’s hard for many, but with a strong background a lot of people ace LI. When you get through LII come back and we’ll revisit this discussion. Seriously, the two are not even comparable. I’ve seen a lot of savvy quants get stonewalled by that thing.
This is 100% untrue.
Yes, the actuarial exams are difficult for people without mathematical backgrounds. That being said, several people who’ve done both (including the illustrious JDV) have told me that coming from a mathematics undergraduate, they found the CFA harder as that was foreign to them. So it’s all relative.
I know dozens of people in IB (assuming you’re refering to the actual IB side of the business doing M&A and offerings, etc), and most of them would have little or no interest in actuaries unless they’re covering the financial / insurance sectors. It’s just not relevant and most are more concerned about your presentation and qualitative skills. A monkey can build a model.
I never said it was without effort. I didn’t understand what equity was when I started it. I put in a reasonable amount of time in it. I’m just saying that if you’ve got a background and put in a reasonable amount of time near the end, it is not as hard as everyone says it is. I don’t see why everyone wants to keep reiterating that the CFA program is “insanely hard/near impossible.” I can’t do quantum physics but I can ace MCQ-based exams. What’s the big deal?
Gotcha. I re-read your post, seems fair enough. To be honest, I may have confused your name with karlite’s posts (too many new users popping up here) and you may have gotten a stiffer response than intended.
Lanky, what levels have you taken? Are you currently enrolled?
I’m enrolled for L2 June 2013.
Also, I’ve been unable to devote time to studying. Mainly because I’m doing a graduate degree. However, the course ends around the start of May. In the month before the exam, I’m pretty much going to go all out and breathe, sleep and drink Schweser. Let’s see how that works out.
Again, I say come back after you get your Level 2 results and tell us what you think. Tell us if you change your mind. And remember that you still have another test to go before you finish.