WHY!!! =(
improve your english then go for both the CFA and the ASA (or FSA) designations. at the earliest, you can’t get your CFA designation until June 2011. (plus you’ll have to have 4 years of relevant work experience). As far as the ASA, it’ll take an average person 4-6 years; depending on how motivated you are, you might squeeze it in in say 3 yrs. good luck
start on both at the same time I mean… you’ll figure which one is more meaningful as time goes by.
also this is an american forum and how do we know the salary people get after CFA in India. Try google or join local CFA society.
It doesn’t take 7 years to pass the CFA! I know many who have done it in 2-4years. during that time most worked gain the experience. After you pass l2, employers take you seriously. Q to the poster: Why do you want to get into investment analysis? Do you know much about the markets? Most who switch from engineering to investment analysis, generally do not have the “personality type” employers are looking for. (ie, aggressive, very sharp, and extremely articulate, educated from a pedigree university in the States or Europe). If this doesn’t fit your profile, many firms won’t invite you to progress in the interview process. (Even now, many who fit this profile are currently in the applicant pool). So, if you like finance, look into becoming a CPA/Auditor or get into financial systems. You probably will be much happier.
Hi all, I put a query regarding career in Finance and you all give me good response and guidance which will quite helpful for me. Thanks a lot for that. But still my one query regarding CFA vs Actuary is not answered correctly and I am still confused regarding that. I need a detail response from all of you. I am agree with your point that both CFA and Actuarial are quite tuff exam and need lot of dedication and commitment. And I wanna tell you all that I am ready for that. But I need a guidance from all of you people as you have experience of this field and can better suggest me. See since I am new in Finance field and interested to make a career in this domain. I just need to know from all of you which one is better to start a career in Finance field in term of job availability, salary offered and job security. I might be agree with your point that finance field is currently doing very bad because of recession but that will not the case after 1 year I feel so and till that time lot of opportunity will come in finance market , this is my perception. So if you be optimistic then could you please tell me which field is better for me a person from Semiconductor industry looking for a career in Finance domain. I hope your rich experience in this domain will guide be better to decide a career path. Please give the clear answer for this query as I am quite confused with it and not able to decide. As per my understanding CFA take around 2 to 3 years to clear all the level ( if you not consider the CFA designation which might require 3-4 years work exp.) and Actuary Fellow require around 4-5 year average, so if I look in time term CFA look me bright to start career early in Finance, but still I want your suggestion regarding that which one will be better. Please answer me earliest.
I find your post pretty hard to understand, maybe it’s just me
actuaryalfred Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I find your post pretty hard to understand, maybe > it’s just me Dude its a joke so you all can be asking yourself this question. After his second post, i am too ‘very optimistic’ thats its a joke. who knows maybe its the same calculator guy? 3,600/- INR
Jagshemash! In US of A, woman can be a CFA but horse cannot?
Hey actuaryalfred, Sorry if you find my post difficult to understand. Let me tell you in simple short word my query. I am a hardware guy who is looking for career in finance, and that why asking people guidance who have experience in this field because they can guide me better. Second this I am confused regarding CFA and Actuary and just want to know which one is better for me to start a career in Finance. I just want to know which is better in term of job prospective(Salary and opportunity available). I hope i made myself clear and now looking for your guidance.
Hey surveyinn, I am not doing any joke here, I am quite serious and really need people guidance regarding my query. I am just a hardware guy who is looking for career in finance, and that why asking people guidance who have experience in this field because they can guide me better. Also I am confused regarding Actuary vs CFA and just want to know which one is better for me regarding job prospective(Salary and job opportunity). also if you have problem with optimistic word I used in my last post I want to clear why i used it. As you know financial market is doing very badly today because of recession and so lot of people say that don’t go in that field. So I just want to say that be optimistic that market will get stable 1 year down the line and suggest me in that scenario. I hope now you cant blame me .
I think this guy is honest, though he has a misguided assumption that it only takes sitting and passing an exam to get a good job. A few questions for you: Where do you see yourself in 10-15 years from now? What are your interests - and where do you want to work? A career in finance is not just about sitting a three level exam - some of us have tried switching to a pure finance role and are still not able. This is despite the fact we can speak and write very good English, and educated in very good universities and work with some of the best companies in the world. Why do you want to change your career from “hardware” to things, with all due respect, you have no idea? Without even assuming you will leave India, there are many very good Business Schools in India, with very bright students(who can express themselves far much better) - and you will be competing against them. May be I am being too harsh - but if your online personality is any thing to go by, a career in finance is not suited for you. You won’t get anywhere in finance if you can’t look someone in the eye and hold a half-decent conversation. An Actuarial Career is the reverse of finance(they are not known to have any personality) - but requires many years of preparation. Is it worth spending 7 years preparing for the qualification? I would say yes, but if you know what you are doing and where you are going. It appears you don’t, though. My advice is you keep on keeping on with your current role, or try accounting as some one has mentioned. My ten cents.
Hey JOE, I am quite agree with you that sitting and passing an exam is not the thing to get a job. you should be smart enuf and capable for that. But since my background is not finance so to get knowledge of this field I feel that some certification will be helpful for me and then ultimately for job also. I am looking for career switch because I am interesting in Finance field and seriously looking for a career in it. I am not just running behind money. I am not afraid of hard-work or many years of preparation but one thing also clear that I couldn’t just prepare for exam for 7-8 years without any job that’s for sure. This what I mean to say. Thanks for your feedback. Looking for guidance in future also
Neeraj, Clearing only CFA exams won’t help you find a job in India unless: 1) You hold a MBA. and/or 2) You have very good contacts. I am from India and thus know the situation here. Period. don’t have much idea about Actuaries.
NeerajDBA, I am currently working in the actuarial field and work with many actuaries who also hold the CFA charter. Here’s my advice for you - take the CFA exams and maybe just the first three actuarial exams in probability, financial mathematics, and models for financial economics. To become an associate actuary (ASA), not only do you need to pass the first 7 exams (or 5 preliminary exams + 2 sets of modules assessments), you would also need 6 educational requirements (micro/macroeconomics, applied statistics in regression and time series, and investments, corporate finance). People who came from a non-business background might not have these courses completed in school. The Society of Actuaries grants credits for these six course requirements to those who have completed the CFA exam levels I and II. Therefore alot of those actuaries whom I work with that came from different backgrounds have also completed all all three levels of the CFA exam and hold the charter. That’s why I would advice you to take the CFA exams even if you are thinking about the possibility of an actuarial career. Like others said, completing all the actuarial exams require many years of studying, and often times not doable without company sponsorship. Many employers would like to see that you have completed a few exams before they would consider you for work. Therefore I would think that if you are considering the possibility of an actuarial career you should take the first three exams. There are actuaries practicing in the field of investments, with the majority of them working in pension funds or insurance companies; though some work in banks. The primary focus of these actuaries are liability-relative investment strategies - using quantitative techniques in asset allocation/selection to generate a higher return on their assets than the rates credited to the liabilities (pension payout, insured annuities), while duration matching assets to liabilities to ensure they have the same sensitivity to interest rate movements. Investment actuaries are required to complete two specialty exams offered by the Society of Actuaries in Advanced Investments and Advanced Financial Economics. Some of materials on these exams overlap with those on the CFA, so many of these investment actuaries write the CFA exams. Just a couple points for you to consider.
Hi Penny, Thanks for such a descriptive reply. This would reply help me to take a decision. I hope in future also I will able to get my query answered by you.
7 exams?? How many textbooks per exam. CFA is pretty much on average of 5 textbooks per level.
its 5 exams, plus 8 modules with 2 assessments, and 3 educational requirements (typically completed by 5 college/online courses - or the first 2 CFA exams), and a professionalism course; just for the ASA… FSA is basically 2 more exams, 3 modules, and another professionalism course (I think - this also depends on the track). The CAS (ACAS/FCAS for those that work in P&C) have a similar path, where modules are replaced by an exam or material is moved to a current exam. For the first 5 preliminary exams most people use study guides. To gauge the difficulty of the exam by the number of textbooks is a really poor measure of difficulty in this case. I think the first three exams are technically 1 textbook each, and the other 2 preliminaries are a compilation of 2-4 textbooks of material. However, since these are much more quantitative exams than the CFA exams the number of pages of reading material may be less but in no way does that imply that you are expected to know “less” or apply “less” of what you have been studying. I think the FSA exams require a compliation of material from like 5-8 textbooks, and they’re 6 hours of essay format so it’s an entirely different beast of material. Having taken both the first 3 actuarial exams, and sitting for the 4th next week, as well as having passed the first CFA exam; I can tell you without a doubt that they are completely different, but so far the actuarial exams have been more challenging. Overall, attaining even just the ASA takes longer and more time/effort than the 3 CFA exams take. I know this from my own experience, and others who are pursuing both the CFA/FSA. Most people get company support for attaining the ASA/FSA (or ACAS/FCAS) and you did it VERY quickly if you get your FSA within 5 years, most people take 3-6 for the ASA and another 2-4 for the FSA.
IheartMath Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > its 5 exams, plus 8 modules with 2 assessments, > and 3 educational requirements (typically > completed by 5 college/online courses - or the > first 2 CFA exams), and a professionalism course; > just for the ASA… > > FSA is basically 2 more exams, 3 modules, and > another professionalism course (I think - this > also depends on the track). The CAS (ACAS/FCAS > for those that work in P&C) have a similar path, > where modules are replaced by an exam or material > is moved to a current exam. > > For the first 5 preliminary exams most people use > study guides. To gauge the difficulty of the exam > by the number of textbooks is a really poor > measure of difficulty in this case. I think the > first three exams are technically 1 textbook each, > and the other 2 preliminaries are a compilation of > 2-4 textbooks of material. However, since these > are much more quantitative exams than the CFA > exams the number of pages of reading material may > be less but in no way does that imply that you are > expected to know “less” or apply “less” of what > you have been studying. I think the FSA exams > require a compliation of material from like 5-8 > textbooks, and they’re 6 hours of essay format so > it’s an entirely different beast of material. > > Having taken both the first 3 actuarial exams, and > sitting for the 4th next week, as well as having > passed the first CFA exam; I can tell you without > a doubt that they are completely different, but so > far the actuarial exams have been more > challenging. > > Overall, attaining even just the ASA takes longer > and more time/effort than the 3 CFA exams take. I > know this from my own experience, and others who > are pursuing both the CFA/FSA. Most people get > company support for attaining the ASA/FSA (or > ACAS/FCAS) and you did it VERY quickly if you get > your FSA within 5 years, most people take 3-6 for > the ASA and another 2-4 for the FSA. I like you. Very much.
IheartMath Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > its 5 exams, plus 8 modules with 2 assessments, > and 3 educational requirements (typically > completed by 5 college/online courses - or the > first 2 CFA exams), and a professionalism course; > just for the ASA… > > FSA is basically 2 more exams, 3 modules, and > another professionalism course (I think - this > also depends on the track). The CAS (ACAS/FCAS > for those that work in P&C) have a similar path, > where modules are replaced by an exam or material > is moved to a current exam. > > For the first 5 preliminary exams most people use > study guides. To gauge the difficulty of the exam > by the number of textbooks is a really poor > measure of difficulty in this case. I think the > first three exams are technically 1 textbook each, > and the other 2 preliminaries are a compilation of > 2-4 textbooks of material. However, since these > are much more quantitative exams than the CFA > exams the number of pages of reading material may > be less but in no way does that imply that you are > expected to know “less” or apply “less” of what > you have been studying. I think the FSA exams > require a compliation of material from like 5-8 > textbooks, and they’re 6 hours of essay format so > it’s an entirely different beast of material. > > Having taken both the first 3 actuarial exams, and > sitting for the 4th next week, as well as having > passed the first CFA exam; I can tell you without > a doubt that they are completely different, but so > far the actuarial exams have been more > challenging. > > Overall, attaining even just the ASA takes longer > and more time/effort than the 3 CFA exams take. I > know this from my own experience, and others who > are pursuing both the CFA/FSA. Most people get > company support for attaining the ASA/FSA (or > ACAS/FCAS) and you did it VERY quickly if you get > your FSA within 5 years, most people take 3-6 for > the ASA and another 2-4 for the FSA. you did an excellent job. i started taking exams back in the 90s and took several 100 series and 200 series exams. i took a total of maybe over 20 exams. then they changed the system and i had to take more exams. they have now made it somewhat easier with the self study modules thingy.