I think it is important to note that I - and I alone- write the entirety of the Wiley program. To say that all Learning objectives are not covered is materially false. I personally know that each are covered because I wrote them.
Well, _ even the first sentence is wrong _: I just need to open the Wiley Study Guide Part I (Crouhy, Chapter 2 - "Learning objective: Evaluate some advantages/disadvantages of hedging risk exposures) and find that this “LO” is _ not covered at all. _
Then, as another example Part II (Caouette, Chapter 6 - Rating Agencies) - all learning objectives (8 in total!) have been covered within 1.5 half pages - this is simply riducolous. Two sentences for each learning objective will not do for a chapter which was heavily tested this time! This reading does not cover anything about the different rating grades between Moody’s/S&P (rating transition matrices etc.) - could not be worse!
Next example Part II (Dowd, Chapter 2 - Measures of Fin. Risk) - covering (perhaps the most important concept of FRM Part I - VaR and ES) within 3.5 half pages is a complete No-GO. Only 3 coherent risk measures have been mentioned (_ translation invariance was obviously forgotten! _). Only two sentences about spectral risk measures - the same holds for scenario analysis.
On top of it, the explanation (one sentence to be precise) why VaR is not a coherent risk measure shows how bad Dowd’s chapter is covered!
For the Crouhy reading, there is a double line between the learning objective and the answer to that LO. Every LO is 100% covered because I wrote them. For the rating agencies, There are no fewer that 27 references to credit ratings, rating migrations, the probability density functions that are derived from those tools, etc across all elements of notes, lectures and problems.
Not sure who this person is working for but my personal email is christian.cooper.us@gmail.com if anyone has any questions or concerns.
The opposite is true and the pure evidence is given on page 9 of the WILEYY FRM Exam Review booklet where the LO “Evaluate some advantages and disadvantages of hedging risk exposures” of Crouhy’s chapter 2 is empty. It might be well true that you have written the LO’s, but they are terribly bad and this is then even more embarrassing for you.
How on earth could someone liying like this?
Next one, I am explicitly referring to the FRM Exam Review booklet, NOT lectures etc. You can defend whatever you want - it is evident how bad “rating agencies” have been covered. If you like, I can post a picture of this LO as well in order to show everyone that you are not right here.
What’s about translation invariance in Dowd’s chapter? It is simply not there under the 4 coherent principles!
Next example if you like the list to be extended: "McDonald’s Chapter 6 “Commodity Forwards & Futures”: three LO’s (1.) Define carry markets and illustrate storage costs 2.) Describe an arbitrage transaction in commodity forwards 3.) Compute the forward price of commodity)
have been taken together within half a page. Awful, only the formulas from Mc Donald’s book have been copied incl. a murky comment.
Next example, Fabozzi “Corporate Bonds” (Chapter 12): LO “Define recovery rates and describe the relation between recovery rates and seniority”: just two sentences to cover this reading.
Everyone who is a sentient being could easily understand that such a bad coverage of each LO is definitely not the way one should prepare for the exam.
Hi All … I have been Mr. Cooper’s notes for Preparing for my Part 1 FRM and i will be using the Part 2 notes when they will be published and i can assure you that his notes are more than enough to score well and the personal problem solving mr Copper does is just amazing and Mr Cooper has always answered my queries asap. When one watched the videos it feels like we are really understanding the deeper meaning of what it is to be a risk analyst.
Don’t know why you insult people perspnally here? I always sticked to hard facts and did not offend anyone in contrast to you! Gettinn personally abusive towards somebody is really poor.
I appreciate your intent to make everyone aware… from several sources i have read, it appears that Wiley is one of the best for FRM. You may be true about the LOs you are mentioning but I would go with the majority of the comments and trust Mr. Cooper for his ability to provide notes that are adequate to understand the concepts and pass. I am not really looking for detailed notes as I will definitely not be interested to study every LO in detail. I will refer to more sources like videos or specific books published on any particular LO if I am interested more and that too only after exam. Right now, the objective is to learn adequately and pass and this objective can be achieved by using Wiley materials.
Schweser CFA has a book called Secret Sauce that is like a synopsis of the entire curriculum. BT for Part 1 had a 150-page packet similar in style that touched upon almost the entire curriculum and various formulas. The pdf was a bit dated, but still largely useful. Not sure if BT has it for Part 2.
I used BT for parts 1 and 2. The real value is not in the BT Notes per se (at least for me). Rather, it was in David’s responsiveness and the wonderful forum participation, coupled with the BT Notes, Videos and Spreadsheet examples.
One thing I would emphasize is the fact that, in my opinion, 99% of folks leave the exam feeling like they failed even after preparing sufficiently. I think the exams are designed this way.
I felt like I failed both parts when I left the exams and was happy to learn that I passed with strong quartiles. (I sat for Part I in 2014 and PARt 2 in 2016.)
Please tell the tentative dates for availability of videos and practice questions. Whatever you will say , I will add 1 month to it as Wiley has always been late…