“To pass, one needs to be in the 70th percentile relative to the top 1% of the scores attained on the exam. In layman’s terms, there are 360 possible points one can attain (relax, nobody has ever scored that high…according to legend). Say, the top 1% of test-takers score a 320 (88% of all possible points). In order to be in the 70th percentile, one needs a score of 224. Thus, a passing score can be achieved even if you receive credit for only 62% of all possible points. So, say you have a 223, but ace the Ethics, you will pass. However, if you drop a stink-bomb on the ethics portion of the exam, you will not receive a letter praising you for passing the exam.” I think this is it guys, thats why 70% is a guaranteed pass because the top 1% of participants cant score a perfect 100%. So if the top 1% gets avergae 90%, 63% will get you a Pass. Here’s the link: http://www.angelfire.com/ma3/gillsie/cfa.htm
So we just need to convince all the really smart guys to tone it down a bit.
They should offer bonus points.
That’s not the current grading scheme - the website you are looking at has not been updated since the dinosaur age. Currently CFAI uses a method similar to the modified Angoff method - if you do not know what that means feel free to google it. Short version of the method: the board of governors pull out a number as the pass % from their rear end after bogus consideration for ambiguous questions, level of difficulty etc. Finally grading schemes are irrelevant - just study the material inside out - you are better off irrespective of whether you pass or fail.
My logic is a bit different. I am making the broad assumption that roughly 40% will pass the exam. Being an optimist, I only have to make it in the top 40% or the 60th percentile to pass. Not that bad, huh?
Its unfair! They should tell us in advance so atleast we know how much we have to get right. Ideally, of course we should give it our best, but this ambiguity ups the stress levels
On page 9 of this link there is a detailed description of how they grade the exams: http://www.cfainstitute.org/cfaprog/overview/pdf/IntoOur5thDecade.pdf
Page 9 on that pdf is more obscure and incomprehensible than the entire curriculum!
That’s quite an article.
sundusg_ Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Its unfair! They should tell us in advance so > atleast we know how much we have to get right. > Ideally, of course we should give it our best, but > this ambiguity ups the stress levels Need some large hands to massage you and calm you down?
That’s really unfair, they should pass all the candidates whoever who attempted to sit in the exam for complete 6 hours!!!
lol CareerThruCFA, I doubt you will get to walk on the career path you are pursuing if that happens. I agree with VR, the link eisman4 posted is practically useless, I’ve read it before. nuppal, its over. Stop trying.
sundusg_ Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > nuppal, I can’t stop thinking about you, > i’ve made a terrible mistake… 
Maybe, im deeply scarred…
sundusg_ Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > lol CareerThruCFA, I doubt you will get to walk on > the career path you are pursuing if that happens. > > > I agree with VR, the link eisman4 posted is > practically useless, I’ve read it before. > > nuppal, its over. Stop trying. No, I think probably they should pass all the candidates who are willing to sit for 8 hrs instead of 6 hrs, What do you think???
nuppal, it’ll wash over. especially after you get the results CareerThruCFA, it would still be too easy.
“falling pass rates over time reflect, among other things, the expansion of the candidate pool, candidate aptitude, and candidate preparation habits.” there you have it guys. according to the institute the caliber of candidates have just deteriorated over the past 40 years, Not the test getting harder. what a joke.
thats offensive. i detect a violation of ethics here (misrepresentation)
i took a stalla course that was taught by a guy who used to work at cfai. he said that if you plot everyone’s scores into a histogram, it will usually have two humps. the cfai then chooses a mps around where the right tail of the lower curve meets the left tail of the higher curve. i’m sure there is a lot more to it, but i think this method makes a lot of sense
That makes sense for level 1 actually, there were a whole bunch of ppl there that weren’t that prepared. I was quite surprised.
A lot of folks just can’t keep up with the study regimen. A number of students in my review course fell behind and never fully caught up. It’s hard and demanding – life intrudes.