Ok, what did everyone think?
Harder than expected? Easier than expected? As expected?
Personally, I thought the AM section was fairly straight forward and not bad at all.
PM section on the other hand…Lord have mercy.
As always, let’s be mindful about not discussing specific questions, etc.
As my third time taking it, I thought it was easier than expected. I hammered the EOC questions all last week so maybe that’s what helped me. The difficulty between the two seemed comparable.
Same. Glad I’m not the only one.
I felt that AM was easier than CFAI mocks, but PM was slightly harder than CFAI mocks. Lots of tricky questions.
AM was like walk in the park, PM was like fighting godzilla.
AM was easier than CFAI mocks and i felt thats it!!!..
PM made my head swinging…got panic attack…i guessed some 15-20 ques…during last 1 hour i was thinking whether i studied at all during the year… :(…
…there was something grossly wrong in my preparation… i still have to clearly figure out…
Am seemed pretty easy, enough that I had confidence that I would pass overall…then PM hit.
That was hard as hell, and some of those topics were soooooo damn fringey and portfolio management wasn’t what I was expecting it to be.
Here is my hope:
90% on ethics overall (I got 100% last year)
80% of equity (55% last year)
60% on FRA (45% last year and I feel like I’m being over hopeful here)
30% on PM (I really think I bombed here this year; I didn’t get a single one right last year)
60% on fixed (73% last year so I might be underselling myself on my hopeful score)
50% on quant (40% last year but I felt better this year and again I might be underselling myself)
60% on alts (60% last year)
60% on derivs (60% last year)
70% on econ (I legit got a 30% last year because I basically punted this section like I did in LI, worked for LI but not LII)
50% corp fin (45% last year but this year I knew more for sure and I definitely got several right)
If all that is right (and assuming I recalled the weightings right) then I’ll be just at the minimum (63%). Maybe I did better on port mang than I thought or maybe I did worse on equity than I thought. IDK but this will at least give me some hope for the next 6 weeks.
Proof from last year
https://i.imgur.com/GkFm067.png
Seriously my econ and PM were embarrassing
Even with those scores I ended up halfway between the MPS and the 10th percentile.
i had to guess a few questions. i feel like 10-15 computation-related questions of the PM session were mock-level complicated. good thing i kinda invested some points in the AM session.
just curious on how this is going to be graded, the difficulty and how candidates managed through it (mostly bad where i took it), will pull the MPS down. am i correct?
Yes, it’s graded on a curve of sorts, called the Modified Angoff Method.
_ Modified Angoff Method (item-centered): Subject matter experts (SMEs) are generally briefed on the Angoff method and allowed to take the test with the performance levels in mind. SMEs are then asked to provide estimates for each question of the proportion of borderline or “minimally acceptable” participants that they would expect to get the question correct. The estimates are generally in p-value type form (e.g., 0.6 for item 1: 60% of borderline passing participants would get this question correct). Several rounds are generally conducted with SMEs allowed to modify their estimates given different types of information (e.g., actual participant performance information on each question, other SME estimates, etc.). The final determination of the cut score is then made (e.g., by averaging estimates or taking the median). This method is generally used with multiple-choice questions._
I’m happy I banked some points on AM too. I might have legit gotten a 50% or so in PM.
AM was not too bad, some tricky and wordy questions but I felt somewhat good. I knew PM was going to be harder, but didn’t think it would be that brutal. Each section on the PM portion was tricky, I probably scored in 50s on that one X.X
Never eat junk fast-food the night before exam. I went to restroom several times before and during exam.
I felt alternative investments was tricky.
What was approximately the MPS for 2018 exam? Judging for the picture above, it was around 66%? Just my guess
Any idea of this?
Finished Am part with 40-45 mints left, question were straight forward, the Pm one was tricky. Troubled at couple of alternative calculation, thought the method I used was right, but couldnt match any thing from selections. Nearly marked 10 questions from Pm part for unsure or unfilled in process then came back figured some questions out, but still left 2–3 firmly unsure.
PM was a slap in the face
Rather it was blow to the jaw, punch to the gut, and after you are on the ground, pi**ing on you.
AM session was very easy, PM being definitely a lot harder (also more difficult than mocks, etc.). The afternoon session had a lot of 50/50 ethic questions + FRA + PM being quite difficult with a lot of traps and tricky questions, etc. Overall, with the two sessions combined, the difficulty of the exam was comparable to that of the official mocks or slightly harder, what do you think?
I feel given the difficulty of the exam, the AM session will save me, so my score should be a normal pass (expect to be around the 70th percentile with 70ish correct answers or something like that).
p.s. Last year the MPS was rumored to be 81/120 which is already somewhat high. If someone failed last year’s Level II exam and retook it this year, how do they compare in difficulty?
I just remembered that I wrote the wrong date for both sessions. Is that a big issue?
They pay attention to what a scanner can read I believe
Okay, thank you.
Third time sitting for level II, this was definitely the hardest due to the PM session. Some tough questions where you had to really understand the material. I walked out the last two times thinking I passed, but I have no clue this time. We’ll find out in 1.5 months.