I just finished the 2007 exam AM and again, below 60% scoring… Besides that, I have a question for those who already took it. I thought in Q1 that the dude was individualist as he was doing his research and, contrary to methodical investors, he was less risk averse. But All-Mighty CFAI says the opposite. Anyone could explain if I missed something?
I chose methodical, and my written answer was “researches investments on his own, but is risk averse”. The second bullet point was “Jack and Ruth both agree they will accept a lower return if it means they can take less risk”, so I figured that means he’s risk averse.
Yeah, agree with Matt. The lower return quote tipped me off. But I can see how you would put individualist. Question for you two since you guys have recently done this exam. Out of curiosity how would you grade this: In the return calc for that question I got everything right, except for the FV input, I used 3MM*1.025^35 to get the inflation adjusted value in 35 years. Everything else was correct, but that threw the final number off. How much partial credit is that worth?
Schweser prof said generally if the people mention anything about risk, it means they’re averse (e.g., this question, or want to limit losses to 10%, etc.) Unless of course it’s obvious like, “I don’t give a hoot about losses. I’ve never had one!”
Thanks guys, I agree with your comments and actually realize that I missed the part about the lower retunr and taking less risk. Ozzy, I think you can definitely give you a partial credit for that. A friend who took classes told me that the teacher, a former grader, said that graders are not judging only the final result, but also the reaosning behind the calculation. That being said, for the mock exams I tend to give me a very conservative 33% of the points when it’s not exactly the answer, in order to have an idea of what I am really worth…