Listen up Schweser Execs: DO NOT and I repeat DO NOT ever say that a topic is “highly unlikely to show up on exam day” or “calculations most likely won’t be required” again. Call me a conspiracy theorist but I think CFAI loves reading that kind of talk and makes test takers pay for it. Anyone else agree?
I make it a point to study those sections even more…its my own form of contrarian mindset
i think you are right to a point. remember that if CFAI tries to hammer the schweser users, it might hammer “its own” as well. if there is some minor, obscure formula that schweser says to ignore, its likely that a lot of CFAI readers will not know it either. the problem comes in when schweser misses entire sections and the losers at the CFAI try to punish schweser users for that.
Yea I agree with you on that point. But its just my opinion that its not wise for schweser to say stuff like that. IMO if its in the schweser notes then you should probably know it cold.
Which topics did Schweser say were unlikely to appear?
Macro attribution for starters and low and behold it shows up on the mock International correlation measures which also showed up on the sample or mock too Any other Schweser users remember anything else im missing?
formula for delta for options on futures Hedging risks of MBS formula for adding an asset to a portfolio. Break-even spread analysis (The default of CFAI is the domestic duration, not the longer duration as in Schw.) Plus a number of details that you get from the end of chapter questions in CFAI text. I have never used the CFAI texts before, so comparing the two for the first time, I would say, Schw. did a good job summarizing 90% of the ideas as required by the LOS statements.