I have run out of material to study – I have not yet done the blue box examples, and i don’t want to go through all of them because it takes too long. Any guidance as to which ones would be considered particularly key? I’m sure they are prob all important, but undoubtedly there are those that you have come across more than once on sample exams and therefore would consider more relevant. This kind of goes along with the “important EoC” thread, but i found when i went through the EoC that there was quite a bit left out, that i presume was covered in the blue boxes.
I just went through all the blue box examples looking for unfamiliar stuff. I ignored everything I felt I knew. It only took me a day or so.
I am doing exactly that these days… Scanning the ones that look familiar but spending some time on the ones not covered in EOC. Vol 5 esp. Derivatives part has many blue box examples that don’t get covered in EOC
i truly hate volume 5.
yeah, i dont understand why volume 5 has such puny EOCs
Singer-Terhar(SP?) in the CAPM section was unlike any EOC.
I’m in book 5, too much informatiom there.need a day to scan it all…some asset allocation, equity, swap, monitoring example are good. Examples could be mostly helpful for PM, IMO.
there were the blue boxes that tested use of options to reduce effective annual rates on loans. they do examples where you use calls, puts, and are both the lender and the borrower. this showed up on the sample exams and there was not an EOC question on it. only the blue boxed
The Singer one and the options to adjust effective annual rate i actually picked up through schweser. I have a feeling most of the nasty stuff not covered by EoC lies in book 5 and 6
Paraguay Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Singer-Terhar(SP?) in the CAPM section was unlike > any EOC. Hey guys, could you tell us where Singer-Terhar section is in CFAi and the blue box example? Remember wanting to come back to this topic but now I can’t remember where it is (or what it is…) Thanks!
Glossary FTW. Book 3
It’s the thing with risk premiums, illiquidity premiums and degree of segmentation and integration. It’s in one of the economics sections…
have a strong feeling they are gonna test that.
Did you guys all attend the 3-day workshop thus the concentration with the BLUE BOXES? I personally haven’t done them as /i feel the workshop question book covers alot of the blue boxes material.
JP_RL_CFA Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > have a strong feeling they are gonna test that. Same… I have taken 2007-2010 morning, and have not seen one question related. I have taken various mocks, and seen it maybe once outta 10. This is “overdue” (gamblers fallacy?)
Thanks all… that example is actually a little complex. not hard to understand, but takes time. Just hope I can still remember all that under the time pressure if it shows up.
markCFAIL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > JP_RL_CFA Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > have a strong feeling they are gonna test that. > > > Same… I have taken 2007-2010 morning, and have > not seen one question related. I have taken > various mocks, and seen it maybe once outta 10. > This is “overdue” (gamblers fallacy?) I wouldn’t think an item set though and if it was it would be the simpler relationships. Not (Beta)(Beta)(Variance MKT) / (SD1)(SD2) = correlation.
That formula frustrates me… When is it just (Beta*Beta*Var) versus (Beta*Beta*Var)/(SD1*SD2) I’ve seen both… blah…
Numerator is Covariance. Denominator turns covariance into correlation. I figured that formula out in 2 seconds. It took me 3 read throughs to realize that Beta = correlation(SDasset/SDmkt)
Thats right… diminishing returns I say… for real, adios. GL