tough luck man…i estimated my score based on the minimum that I must have scored e.g. FRA…my result said above 70% … So, I went with the minimum possible for all areas, which comes out to be 64. It could have been more…but I know for sure I atleast had 64 correct.
I totaly agree, Equity and FRA were easier last year.
Best of luck for this year.
The CFA Institute sets a minimum passing score, not a pass rate. The pass rate is a function of the MPS they choose (among other variables). The MPS, though, is the mark for each candidate.
Pages 10 and 11…
https://www.cfainstitute.org/programs/cfaprogram/Documents/cfa_program_theory_meets_practice.pdf
“Standard setting involves a large and diverse group of CFA charterholders. The lead psychometrician divides participants into two smaller groups for each level of the examinations. Each participant reviews the entire exam, question by question, and makes an independent judgment on the expected performance of a just-competent candidate on each question.”
and
“Although pass rates may fluctuate, the board’s objective is to require a consistent standard competency level across years.”
Again, they determine a score that a minimally competent candidate would achieve. If everyone passes, everyone passes. If everyone fails, everyone fails.
There are some things that the institute will not make public. If over 50% of the candidates all scored above 65% on the exam it is highly unlikely that you would see the pass rate above 50%, its part of mainitining the quality of the qualification (which you would never know hence the reason why you only see a broad range of your performance). Hence, the MPS would be slightly raised to say 68% for example, and this is one factor, or “variable” as they mention, that is taken into account when setting the MPS along with their other assessments and evaluations they make, otherwise, logically speaking you would see the pass rates fluctuate a lot from year to year, but that does not happen, and in recent years it stays consistently in the low to mid 40s.
But, they are telling you that the MPS is designed to have a minimally competent candidate pass. They’ve made it public, and they’ve told you the methodology (modified angoff method, if I recall).
I agree it isn’t likely that an unusually high percentage of candidates would pass, but mainly because the average preparedness of the candidate pool isn’t likely to fluctuate much from year to year (which could also be suggested by a slight fluctuation in the pass rate from year to year). Also, why would a low pass rate necessitate a high quality charter? It could quite easily be due to underprepared candidates taking the exam. Just look on this forum how many people pop up around exam time saying they haven’t prepared, and that they will just take the exam anyway. Imagine how many people beyond this forum do that as well. Think of people who have finance/accounting degrees and they decide to blow off studying because they think it’s a lock for them (I knew people like this, and some of them failed). There is also a tiny, tiny filter (aside from money, a degree or something like that) to sit for a CFA exam. There are many reasons why that pass rate can be low, all of which seem reasonable (and don’t contradict the official statement provided by the Institute).
True, they did say that during a second round of evaluation, they take into account the actual examinee performance on a question. However, they are doing so under the guidance of a standard setting methodology that is designed to objectively distinguish those who are minimally competent from those that are not. The methodology is not geared towards maintaining a pass rate…which would be quite easy, but is usually quite different than determining if someone is competent.
The pass rates could also remain constant within a range due to the fact that the candidate pool is, more or less, equal in preparedness in comparison to other years (which seems fairly reasonable, unless you have a surge in candidate number [or some other shock] from year to year). It’s much easier to conclude that the examinees are about equal in competency from year to year, which leads to a roughly-constant pass rate, rather than concluding that the CFA Institute is blatantly manipulating the MPS outside the guidelines and methodology they’ve said they follow.
This might provide some more insight on the methodology they’ve chosen (and the general idea of standard setting).
Looks like a fail. I’ve seen a lot of grids, and don’t recall seeing a pass like that
so much for hope lol
July xx, 2016…*fingers crossed*
Im assuming July 26th. Isnt it on a Tuesday? Believe it was a tuesday last year at least
Yep, Tuesday, chilling and hoping for the best… Olayeancah, *fingers crossed*
taking level 2 for the third time this year. last year i flunked on the 10th band. last year, I scored above 70% in 4 topics , between 50-70 in two topics and below 50% in 4 topics…i think if i had made on ethics i would have cleared but hey thats life!
I failed at qant and PM cause i didnt study them at all. Ethics i practiced but still messed up. Alternative investments was a total shock cause i was scoring above 80% in all my quizes and mocks before i took the exam.
This year i didnt leave anything. I think portfolio was written very poorly last year (i mean in the curriculum) as i couldnt make head or tail of it all but this year portfolio was much better written, in my opinion.
I am guessing you didnt score > 70% in either FRA, Equity or Fixed Income?
Sam id love to share my ranges on individual topics if that isnt a violation in any way? can you confirm from your end? im also awaiting confirmation from the mod here. thanks!
No, its not a violation. Many other posters have shared their scores. I am curious to see if you got >70% in the heavily weighted topics and still failed?
ok. thanks for the quick reponse. im new here so i wasnt sure how it all works. anyway, im gonna shock you with the fact that i scored above 70% in Equity, FRA deriviatives and economics. 50-70 in fixed income and CF. Below 50 in Quant, PM, Alt and Ethics.
i failed at the 10th band! you sat for the first time?
That sucks! The only reason I can think of is the <50 in Ethics.
This is my second attempt at L2. I took a 10 yr break and came back to the CFA this year.
tell me about it, man. and yeah i thought the same thing about ethics being the deciding factor. I kept thinking what if i had made it on ethics? would i have made it? but thats a sucky way to live!! i slapped myself and told myself to get out of self pity and hit the books again. HARD!
honestly, last year my strategy was to hit the heavy weights hard so i score above 70% in them and near the exam i realised i had put so much work on the heavy weights that i had neglected the lights weights a lot. but i let that go and kept going with my initial strategy. didnt touch quant and PM at all!
one funny thing was that no matter how well i did in the heavy weights my score on the mocks would not exceed 65% (total) this year when i covered everything i would score atleast 67.5% on my mocks even if i messed up. i think its cause i was more balanced this year. i also want to share that my score on FRA this year went down as i was focused on my weaker areas but i would still score near 70%. not showing off or anything just want to make a point that its a bad idea to not touch the light weights because one is too busy hitting the heay weights.
And im glad you came back to CFA again. This is my thrid attempt and i feel more confident than ever before. you see im not the fastest learner but my biggest asset is persistance. i know this one guy who made past level 2 on the 6th attempt. i look up to that guy! like some one wise once said “some of the biggest failures in life that ive seen are people who have never failed at anything”. i think he makes a very good point that if we are to try anything worth spending time on than theres the possiblity that one may fail. or not make it on the first attempt. but that doesnt mean ones a failure. you fail if you fall down and never get back up again. sorry about the long sermon but im a strong believer in “never give up” philosphy! 
Your 40-60-80 estimates is 67%. probably lower bands to blame here, could be <40 (1-2 correct) per set on avg
I completely agree with that. i think i really messed up the lighter weights. i mean talk about messing up bAD in the lighter weights! 
In my calculation of your score, you probably score around 70-74 out of 120, which is 58.3% - 61.7, so taking the upper band, you will fall on band 10.
Based on my estimation, you need to have at least 76-77 out of 120 to be above the MPS.
I hope that you pass this time around… I hope i pass too… lol… count down…