So when a section has 6 questions and you miss 4, you’re done? What if someone crushed every other section?
it could be 10% of overall exam, then if each small topic is 5% and total of two =12 questions then one should score at least 5 questions in those sections.
Yep- like I said, I think it’s pretty rough and would hate to fail because I got 2/6 on one item set that happened to be the only representation for that particular topic. Again, just throwing these out there as conversation points.
Got it, good explanation 
This entire thread is based on YOUR opinion of people who you thought did not deserve to pass. And the CFAI doesn’t pass or fail people based on who you think should pass or fail, if they made the cut - they made the cut, period. It does not in anyway undermine the integrity of the Charter. Let life decide who deserves what.
Chitown, I do not necessarily disagree that perhaps changes need to be made to the process of obtaining or maintaining one’s charter. I am disagreeing with the OP’s statement that test score is indicative of the ability of one candidate or charter holder over another.
If you want to make it harder to obtain, make all three levels 100% essay per LIII. Absolutely no way to hide. I don’t think I would enter that program. It’s hard enough to justify 900+ hours into the program fresh out of college when you would be more efficient in networking and specializing in the applicable topics of your desired career.
If you make it too difficult or time consuming, you run the risk of devaluing the accreditation because the top minds would not pursue it. Too easy and it’s devalued by the flood of unqualified holders. Too expensive or too cheap similarly impacts the balance. $700 early deadline + $400 is manageable per level, but the hours invested really add up. You get the idea.
The CFA isn’t intended to say as much about you as OP seems concerned it does. If OP finishes the program 3 years out of college, he will have 4 years of additional experiences to add to the resume that somebody who takes 7 years will not. Whether OP uses that to focus on friends/family, continue education, network or accept additional responsibilities at his firm will determine whether he is viewed as superior to the candidate that took 7 years.
I agree with items number 1 and 3. On item #1, I say you get two chances to pass a level…fail twice and your out of the program forever. The fact that CE is not already required is absurd. Needs to be instituted.
Number 2 however I think is ridiculous due to the difficulty/ambiguity of some items sets. Ethics, for example, can be retardedly tricky and arguable unfair. Missing four of the highly subjective ethics questions should disqualify you.
Institute idea #2, particularly on Level 3 AM, and you’re going to end up with pass rates <10%.
Institute all three of your ideas together and the charter will fade into oblivion as only Bill Gross and Mohamed El-Erian will be able to pass. Well, and maybe a couple of those guys from The Big Short…
I see your point for sure, especially the third paragraph. thx for the reply!
How many Charterholders do you think are “lucky”? What sample size have you used to draw this conclusion?
Sometimes saying nothing at all is better than saying nothing constructive or something negative for no reason. This is a discussion forum which despite not explicitly stated that has been a place for constructive discussion.
there are also subforums in the website better suited for this discussion (water cooler?), however just for something in life, just because you want to say something, it doesn’t mean you have to :).
I once met a graduate from Harvard and he was a total idiot. I think getting into Harvard is easy…
Most “knowledge” tests is about effort and not raw intelligence. Even a physics major in undergrad for the most part can be mastered through hard work cause it boils down to equations and rules that can be understood by most people of slightly above average intelligence. What’s not clear is the more creative aspects of piecing together different bits of knowledge to create new or a deeper level of knowledge, i.e. for a PhD dissertation or original research. The CFA exams are ultimately structured in a fairly predictable way and the topics it can test are finite and not that deep. If you are methodical about your studying and answering questions and you can pace yourself to peak appropriately, it can seem a bit too game-able. The skill to do that is not that common though, otherwise many more people would appear very bright.
I think it would be cool if they gave a sub-MPS to Ethics. 70% or something. Ie: one could get 85 percent and still fail, because ethics. I don’t think that passing a test, or two, or getting any letters after your name means you’re smarter than those who failed and don’t have the letters. I would see these things as signals that any employer or client would need to use in context to determine how much that adds to your value as an employee or whatever. I also place value in the rigor of the testing process. Sure, some tests in Uni were harder, but I think that it was a lot easier for people to cheat there. Just the fact that we can’t discuss what is on the exam makes it so much harder for the next generation, imo.
if i had to choose between two portfolio managers, i’d choose someone who understands why this post is irrelevant, insensitive and a complete waste of time than to someone who passes all 3 cfa exams on the first try.
Dubinator, what do you say about the 54% that did not make it at Level II this June and 57% that did not pass Level I again this June. I cant imagine what you call them given that you have labeled the few whom you know that passed ‘dumb’. Honestly I do not see how your post add any value to this forum. You are very arrogant and selfish.
If you find the exams so easy, share with others the tricks to easy passing!
I can understand that overall CFA program is too easy for some. What I cannot understand is opening the topic such this one here and what is supposed to be the added value of such topic.
Exactly what I have in mind after reading this post. Thanks for speaking up my mind. I think it is hard to tell how difficult a test is. You couldn’t say the test is easy just because your stupid friends pass it as nobody know whether your friends are truly stupid or not. I have friends who always tell me before the exam that they don’t study for it at all and for sure they will fail. However, they always get higher point than me and make me look like a dumbass because I study my ass off to pass. If you say you don’t study very hard for the exam but still pass it, congratulation, but don’t say the CFA is easy because people, even smart one, did fail for it.
Dubinator,
Passing two levels of the CFA on the first try is certainly admirable and I congratulate you.
Just like everyone, you will have successes in your career and you will have failures. There will be points that you will be up and points where you will be down. There will be times where you are the smartest guy in the room and times you will be the dumbest. Times that you will be promoted ahead of your friends and times that you get left behind. And there will be times where you triumph over challenges that others will struggle with (like the CFA). At the end of the day these generally even out over a career and in ten years, I guaranty you that won’t care (or even remember) how many years it took you to pass the CFA. It’s all just part of aging as a professional.
What will matter to you is your character and how you have handled the yourself on your way up. If you can have the humility to accept your triumphs gracefully and the self-respect to accept your failures with dignity, your life and your career will be a much more meaningful one to you and your reputation will be a much more consequential one to others.
It is the easiest of human instincts to leverage triumphs to humiliate, denigrate and belittle others. I hope you can take a second to consider how your words may affect others.
this topic is insulting to my intelligence. and I could not disagree more.
I have always for whatever reason been very good at taking standardized tests (1480 SAT years and years ago, 760 GMAT just this past year)…and yet I failed the exam on band 9 in June 2016.
and make no mistake, i didnt cut corners. started in january. I tried my HARDEST. gave it my all. Still Failed. I have serious trouble believing that it was a matter of intelligence and furthermore have trouble believing that the individuals you know personally who you say “are not that bright” are indeed not that bright.
Maybe youre trolling, maybe im butthurt/sensitive because I failed (both are probably somewhat the case) but i just dont agree with the premise of your post.