L2 is harder. My background is that I only entered finance two years ago (after 15 years out of school and no quantitative degrees) but I’ve managed to passed L1 and L2 the first time. When I started L2, I wondered why everyone thought it was so much harder (I only knew one person out of maybe thirty charterholders who had passed the first time). Having passed it now, here are my thoughts: 1. the volume is not substantially larger but the depth of the material is greater i.e. in L1 you are building up a background in the material and learning the tools; L2 is implementing those tools so there is more “active” content i.e. stuff you need to know how to use rather than just understand. 2.THE TOPIC WEIGHTINGS: in L2, you could pretty much target FRA, Ethics, Quant and one other topic and you could pass because you knew the exact number of questions to expect. In L2, the percentages are variable so you cannot target as much. Also, they can and do throw questions from other topic areas into a topic. 3. THE QUESTION FORMAT: The question format is almost a topic area in and of itself in that you *need* experience and practice reading through 2-5 pages and then answering six questions which may centre on a topic area that wasn’t given a lot of attention in the curriculum. So if you are weak on one topic in L1 you might get a couple of questions on it. In L2, you might get a whole vignette on one topic you are weak on and, as each question counts more, this can really hurt. If you get behind on time, it is harder to catch up than in L1 because you have to read 2-5 pages just to begin answering the first of six questions where in L1 you might have (at most) a paragraph. 4. THE NUMBER OF QUESTIONS: L2 has half the number of questions as L1. On the plus side, you have double the time per question. On the downside, because of the extra reading involved, you will need it. The smaller number of questions means you have a smaller ability to show off what you know i.e. with maybe 6 questions on say quant, you might get them asking 6 questions on a topic you are weak on and that is supposed to be representative of your quant abilities. If they’d asked 12 questions you might get 6 weak areas and 6 strong areas and end up with a pass. 5. FORMULAS - L1 has a lot of formulas but you have a much stronger sense of what formulas are key. Also (and I haven’t checked this) but it certainly seemed that there were more LOS’s with the dreaded “calculate” or similar phrasing. In L2, the knowledge is more applied than L1 in that you need to know how to USE these formulas much more often than L1. I would highly recommend trying to finish two months in advance at least and just practice, practice, practice - especially for the calculations e.g. derivatives, FRA, fixed income, etc. 6. CALCULATION DIFFICULTY - L2 is harder. Not ridiculously harder but still trickier. Generally, there is some tricky conceptual stuff in there in the qualitative material. The calculations are not harder but they are more complex i.e. in L1, you might have a calculation that is tricky but is only one or two steps. In L2, there is more than one occasion where you are equally tricky material but the calculations take more steps which compounds the difficulty - more room for error at each step. 7. SCHWESER - I used Schweser entirely for the material and found the videos especially helpful to bring the material to life. I’d watch the video and then reinforce with the reading. My study group did the same thing and we all knew the material, however, I was the only one who passed. I think the main difference is that I did most of the end of chapter questions in the CFAI texts (which takes a long time since some of the questions are short essay responses rather than multiple choice but it makes you understand the concepts better). I think this may have made the difference. I hope this helps. As a fuller description of my experience, I screwed up the morning exam. I got mired down in one item set and got behind. In the second half of the morning, I didn’t really have time to do the calculations and I was pretty shocked when I passed.
thanks a lot trimonious2 
Great insight…Thanks. I was planning to buy schweser, would you say the videos are a must buy or do you think the notes are enough?
Regarding the videos, I think it depends on how you learn. I found them very worthwhile especially on certain topics that are more opaque when read in a book (I had a problem with currency arb, derivatives, some accounting, etc.). I also found it strangely a little less lonely of an experience having someone (albeit pre-recorded) explain things to you and give you tips and tricks. On the whole I would say that they are not must buy but definitely a strong recommendation.
Trimony Trimony Trimo-mo-mo-mo-mo Mony
@ trimoni…2 great insight in great detail…i wish if I smone cud hav posted it last year…may be I would hav passed too. I find my background pretty similar to yours…however I failed L2 with band 10…3 months is really a bad plan to kill L2. how much did u study for L2 and how much wud u suggest me to spend on it this year??
very well organized and concisely written. I have faith in you passing lvl 3 essay sections with flying colors
I completely reject the premise that L2 is absolutely harder than L1. If you were a finance major you will find L1 easy and L2 harder. However L1 is extremely difficult if you have never studied finance/accounting before.
I have no background in finance/accounting and I found L2 much harder than L1. As the OP said, “L2 is implementing those tools so there is more “active” content i.e. stuff you need to know how to use rather than just understand.” Back in L1, I found the exam easy and felt like I overprepared for it. Never had this feeling in L2.
You actually answered the essay questions? I assumed people would just read the question then read the answer then move on until they hit a vignette with multiple choice.
Band10sucksss Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > @ trimoni…2 great insight in great detail…i > wish if I smone cud hav posted it last year…may > be I would hav passed too. I find my background > pretty similar to yours…however I failed L2 with > band 10…3 months is really a bad plan to kill L2. > how much did u study for L2 and how much wud u > suggest me to spend on it this year?? I studied in earnest from late December onwards and studied about 2-3 hours a night Monday through Thursday (took Friday off to ensure my marriage didn’t collapse) and then studied Sat/Sun afternoons during my kids’ naptime (which was anywhere from 1-2.5 hours). I finished reading with about 2 months to go and spent a month writing up notes. The last month was spent doing 4 practice tests and doing EOC questions in CFAI and trying to learn all the darn formulas. I found I knew the formulas well but didn’t spend enough time USING them. I also read the CFAI texts for Ethics. Importantly, I spent the majority of my time ensuring I understood the Equities and FRA materials (with a secondary emphasis on Derivatives and Fixed Income). I kicked butt in Equities and FRA but Derivatives and Fixed Incomes were middling results for me.
great insight , thanks a lot for sharing
Sounds like you can’t bs with this one – you got to be strong in every area or you are taking a large risk. I like that. It keeps the idiots or lazy people from getting the charter hopefully.
CFAI need to cut the passing rate below 10%, so I can be motivated to study harder.
WTF Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > CFAI need to cut the passing rate below 10%, so I > can be motivated to study harder. agree
Hi All, I’ve got an honours degree in finance, I’ve skimmed through all the LOS statements and I actually think that level 2 may actually be somewhat easier for business grads. As level 1 is focused on theory that is covered in the first year of a uni degree most people would have forgotten most of it. In comparison level 2 is based on theory that is covered in later years that many finance grads would have internalised to a greater extent. I guess I’ll find out just how easy the going is when I fly back home this week to collect the textbooks. Good luck! Sean
@ sean1194 I see the point your are making but would disagree. I have a Masters in Finance and passed Level II in June 2011, however would still argue that Level II is a harder course to negotiate. I agree with your contention that recalling the work covered in Level I from past studies was harder due to the time since having studied it, but on balance the content at Level I is on par with the difficulty found in early undergrad courses, therefore once you revise the material I found it came rushing back to the memory banks. In Level II, the material is not, per se, considerably harder, but it does get very detailed. I would describe the level of content as similar to final year studies or professional qualifications studies in the particular subject areas. Due to the nature of a participants former study patterns, they have typically completed higher level studies in at least one and perhaps a few of these areas, however still have certain areas that they have not touched at this level at all. My study pattern was such that I had completed higher level studies in finance and hence found the Derivatives, Fixed Income, Quant and to some degree the Equity material quite manageable, however the Economics, FSA and Corp Finance was well over my head to begin with as understanding balance sheets (and associated entries around multi-national corporations and pension accounting) was not something I had considerable experience or studies in and unfortunately in Level II most topics get to this kind of level in detail. As a saving grace, I can confirm that by the end of my studies I felt that I had all of these areas covered well and was confident going into the exam however I definitely put a lot more time into such areas (as in reading and re-reading notes and examples 5 and 6 times) which I didn’t feel like I had to do at Level I. I feel the OP makes same very good points worth noting but in particular I would rate most important, the idea around having to know topic areas much better at Level II as you will get topics that run for 200 pages and your entire exam vignette (and the 6 associated questions) will be across perhaps 5 of those pages. You will see plenty of entries on this forum screaming blue murder about this fact, but my personal sentiment is that it just ensures you don’t try and cut corners and enter the exam underprepared in topic you either find hard or don’t like. IMHO these complaints are just sour grapes from those who know that they didn’t do enough work and wanted to just scrap through. Best of luck to all in your forthcoming studies and hope this helps.
Band10sucksss Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > @ trimoni…2 great insight in great detail…i > wish if I smone cud hav posted it last year…may > be I would hav passed too. I find my background > pretty similar to yours…however I failed L2 with > band 10…3 months is really a bad plan to kill L2. > how much did u study for L2 and how much wud u > suggest me to spend on it this year?? Me thinks u cud hav sum trubul writing for LIII.