Hi … For example, in Reading 40 LOS h. demonstrate the use of an interest rate swaption (1) to change the payment pattern of an anticipated future loan and (2) to terminate a swap. And in the material, there are 3 sub-topic on swaption. The first two covers the things in the LOS. Is it safe to skip the last topic? just dont want to study more than needed.
Why are you even taking the CFA, you have Angelina, you have millions, come on is teh CFA really necessary for you? Oh and yes you are only responsible for LOS.
This question has come up before. Many people quote CFAI and say that you’re responsible for EVERYTHING in the CFAI texts. This is an important question. There seems to be a lot of material in the CFAI readings that go above and beyond the LOS’s.
My understanding is that if it is not tied to a LOS, it is not testable. However, it’s sometimes hard to tell how much background is required to demonstrate knowledge of the LOS, particularly if you are covering the essay portion.
I would not read the stuff not included in an LOS - it is taking a risk, but the reward is being able to spend that time learning an LOS.
For level one, after reading the texts, I went back and looked up each LOS in the texts. I think thats what helped me score so well. It seemed to me like nothing outside of the information answering the LOS (usually a paragraph…maybe more for complex LOS), nothing was tested. I didnt have time to do this on level two so wasnt able to test thr theory. I wouldnt skip anything however, because I dont want to ever regret doing so (no matter how little the chance). Another way you can look at this is, can you do well on the exam just studying schweser. This is essentially what they do when creating there study guides…they dont include all the extras.
Okay. Here’s where CFAI gets whacky: Reading 13 was 50 pages! Here’s the LOS: The candidate should be able to: a. critique the classic objection to behavioral finance that rational agents will quickly undo any dislocations caused by irrational traders; b. explain how the statement “there is no free lunch” can be valid in both efficient and inefficient markets, and discuss its relationship to the statement “prices are right”; c. evaluate the implementation costs and risks, including fundamental risk and noise trader risk, associated with trades designed to profit from asset mispricings. Reading 13 goes way, way beyond the corresponding LOS. You only need to read a few (out of 50) pages to know the LOS. This is the reading that compelled me to order Schweser.
Its in the Errata where around page 93 or so to the end of the reading is optional…
bigwilly Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Its in the Errata where around page 93 or so to > the end of the reading is optional… Where does it say that? I didn’t see any “optional” symbol anywhere. What’s an errata anyway? Is it Latin for “stuff that should have been written in boldface type in the text but was hidden on the website?”
…its on the CFA Institute website. pg 92 through end of section (42 pages) is optional. Thats a costly
LOL. Oh those rat buzzards…
bigwilly Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Its in the Errata where around page 93 or so to > the end of the reading is optional… holy $h*t!!! I had to spend 3 valuable days to get past those f***ing 42 pages and in the end, I didn’t get any sense out of that cr*p!!!
And there is nothing else on errata as costly as this error…
I dont think so, but the Errata is an evolving beast…