Were the questions closer to Schweser or Bionic Turtle. When I did FRM 1 last year it was exactly like Schewer I need someone to break it down to me please. It would help alot!
This time Questions were from both side…Few Questions (1/4) where par with Schweser and about 3/4 questions where 1/ 1.5 /2 notch higher than Schweser.
People who used BT looked in better position. However I felt one who was really thorough with thr concept has passed the exam. Many Schweser users also passed. But better to use both …One should be prepared for worst rather hoping for best. I burnt my finger s so I am right person to say this 
Wondering the same as OP. Part 1 exam in Nov 2015 seemed really quite pleasant if one simply knew Schweser pretty well. But the consensus is really poor on what is most appropriate study guide. Better safe then sorry seems to close the deal and BT ends up winnning that end of the argument, but that doesn’t make BT a good product per say if you’re wasting time overstudying, figuring out poorly worded answers, and pulling your hair out with the format.
It seems we have several issues with FRM: 1) GARP doesn’t yet have testing consistency, 2) sample size on forums are too small, 3) study prep providers for FRM are only a handful and not all that great (there is no all-encompassing like Schweser is for CFA exams and production quality of Schweser for FRM is seems inferior to their CFA product), 4) budgets are far smaller for FRM for whatever reason. By #4 I mean many people will spend $1000+ for Schweser but BT, Schweser, Wiley FRM are all in the $400 range and yet people want to settle for just 1. I’m reluctant to buy more than 1 package myself. Think this is why there is interest in Wiley’s offering as they should match Schweser on production quality, but everyone is hoping for a rigor level 1 notch above Schweser and clarity 1 notch above BT.
My general thought is that there are too many people looking to only pass and not understand that material, “…wasting time overstudying” is a perfect example - I just don’t believe that you can study too much.
An FRM charter is an indicator that you have basic knowledge of risk management and associated concepts per the learning objectives outlined by GARP – it is not a Masters or PhD in MFE or related subjects. Passing inherently involves understanding the material unless you think the passing rate is too high or the test is not a good measure of knowledge, then that’s a separate discussion. What we’re all kind of unsure about is if Schweser is rigorous enough to help us understand the material to a high enough extent to pass. BT is there to help you gain deepest understanding, but it comes with a significant cost of time and effort if it doesn’t do it efficiently, which I would argue it’s sloppy formatting and abbreviated/shortcut solutions makes it more complicated than it should be. This is where interest in Wiley comes in, where everyone is hoping for an in-between that is more rigorous than Schweser but more efficient than BT.