Honestly, what is the deal with Kaplan’s practice exams at all 3 levels. So complicated, messy, information everywhere. Unrealistic questions that are not worded in the way CFA write.
Who are they kidding? We know by level 3 the exams do not look the way they write them, so why can’t they just create something that is at least vaguely familiar to the style of the actual test.
Completely baffling!
I can’t speak about how realistic the questions are, but so far I’ve noticed the chapter references for many of the answers are not up-to-date.
The major issue i have with their Mock and practice questions in my view is the fact that they structure it wrongly, poorly worded, then first paragraph is supposed to cater for the first question in that order, but Schweser mock and practice questions are not worded in that manner, which is a major turn-off for me.
There’s a skill – perhaps an art – to writing questions in the same manner as CFA Institute. In my experience, most prep providers haven’t mastered that skill.
CFA Institute’s questions are inherently difficult. In my experience, most prep providers questions are inherently easy, and are made difficult by adding exogenous (often convoluted, or extraneous) difficulties.
In addition, the content may not be updated for 2018 material. I have only taken one Schewer practice test so far (Exam 1 Book 1) and the response to one of the questions covers a concept that is not in this year’s material but was in the 2017 material. I wouldn’t be surprised if this happens again.
Which question are you referring to? I dont think this is correct.
Am i the only one who thinks the schweser mocks are actually quite good prep? Sure, theres typos etc, but theyre easy to understand and going through wrong answers forces you to learn the material…
I’m referring to Q3 part E of Exam 1 AM. Conditional correlations are not in the curriculum this year (it was in the 2017 curriculum. I know this because I took L3 last year and failed). Schweser confirmed this concept is not in the curriculum. Not a big deal but just something to keep in mind that some of the content may be stale.
Bottom of page 439 of book 3 in the CFAI books talks about contagion. Agreed that the tools (scenario analysis with different corrs) is not discussed. Thanks, giving myself another mark 
Overall, i still dont think these schweser mocks are a waste of time…
Haha I gave myself another point too when they confirmed it was not in the curriculum. Don’t think they’re a waste of time, they are definitely useful and I’ll take whatever help I can get.
Well this explains why I had no idea what was going on in that question.
Stale material is annoying but is also something I’m ready for. Because the CFAI old AM sections (for obvious reasons) are also stale. But still good practice.
Annoying to pay a 3rd party for a practice test and get questions that aren’t 100% up to date though…
Interesting, would you say that the mocks and the CFAI practice questions on the online portal are structured manner that more closely resembles the actual exam?
The worst questions for me tend to be the ones looking like this:
What is NOT a disadvantage to NOT using the MVO when the analyst know he should NOT have NOT used it! NOT NOT NOT NOT #$@&(^%@(&^#*&%*#&%^!!!
of course, CFAI is the one who will write the real thing anyway. I’ve always prioritized their practice resources from level 1
I hardly find any prep providers stay close to CFAi’s standaed. Hence, I go with CFAi’s materials only
At this point, I’m focusing on old CFAI materials for practicing the AM section. The questions in Schweser are a bit…nonsense. Although I have one more Schweser mock to do which I guess I’ll do next weekend.
I’ve done the AM sections from 2012-2017 and suppose I could do more but I’m not sure if it’s worth it (versus going over things I missed).