Some clarifications before I make my case. I agree that the exam was tough, probably tested us on insignificant things, made time mgmt a very important factor, was very vague in a lot of cases, maybe unfair that there were different sets of papers in Asia. In all probability I might be sitting for the exam again next year and it pisses me off!! The bottom line is that after all the cribbing and cussing, we are left with one undeniable fact, all these things are part and parcel of the real world we live in. Wake up and smell the coffee, things are not fair, sometimes soemone less qualified than you gets the job, its not always the book smart people who go ahead in life, it is the ppl who are street smart who sometimes go ahead. My take is that, all the stuff in the curriculum we can always learn and ace provided everything is perfect. In the financial world things are not always perfect, you dont always have all the data points you require for making a deicsions, you do not have all the time in the world to make a decision but you make a trade-off and get the job done with what you have. I have read posts in which ppl say tht this yrs paper would favor ppl who gave brief answers, didnt do a bang up job in giving the best possible answer etc. Initially, i was also drawn into this argument but then I got thinking. All candidates knew wht was expected from them right in the beginning, we had x number of questions to do in 3 hrs. The book smart people (i place myslef in this category) went about answering each question as best as possible and ended up not completing the paper on time. The street smart ppl realized after the 1st or 2nd question that they r not going to complete the paper unless they changed the rules of the game. So they probably cut down on the size of the answers, tried to chose the questions that gave them the most bang for a buck so that they didnt miss out on scoring on the real easy questions. They essentially tried to game the system without breaking the rules set by CFAI. I am not privy to what objectives CFAI had before setting this years paper but I cant find fault with them for trying to test things besides just the curriculum. I feel learning the curriculum is the easy part, it is learning how to take calculated risks when under pressure that is the tough part and the most important in the real world we live in. So maybe we should thank CFAI for trying to prepare us for the real word!!!
b!tching is part of the human condition
Amen.
80% of the things on the L3 curriculum is not applicable
yeah like what ?
thetank Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 80% of the things on the L3 curriculum is not > applicable Not applicable to who and what ??
for what you want to do VWAP and implementation shortfall, anyone gonna remember this a few months from now? binary options and credit spread options, no one trades these global/macro/micro attribution - again, anyone heard of this being used? GIPS - anyone seen this used?
80% might be an exaggeration, point is as I was studying I kept asking myself how the focus on performance evaluation and portfolio management help me become a better FINANCIAL ANALYST. I thought L2 helped a lot, but didn’t get the same feeling here.
thetank Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > for what you want to do > > VWAP and implementation shortfall, anyone gonna > remember this a few months from now? > binary options and credit spread options, no one > trades these > global/macro/micro attribution - again, anyone > heard of this being used? > GIPS - anyone seen this used? Off-course people use VWAP and implementation shortfall on daily basis. Never heard of Algo-trading ? Same for everything else you mentioned. If you’re not using them does not mean they’re not used.
thetank Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 80% might be an exaggeration, point is as I was > studying I kept asking myself how the focus on > performance evaluation and portfolio management > help me become a better FINANCIAL ANALYST. I > thought L2 helped a lot, but didn’t get the same > feeling here. i’m a portfolio manager and i don’t think the IPS stuff helped me in the slightest.
Thats exactly the point I am trying to make. All the book knowledge we can re-learn just by opening the book, it is the salient aspects of the test that will stay with us long after we have forgotten everything we has learned 
>>GIPS - anyone seen this used? << Apparently you’ve never responded to an RFP for new business…
Self Attribution or all the defense mechanisms of projections play in here… • Its their fault… • Its because THEY asked the wrong questions… • If Only… • I would have been right… I agree with the real world examples you gave - the only side comment I would say is that in the real world, however, if you didn’t have clarity on what they were asking or you had limited information, you could communicate with the other parties and GAIN clarity and make educated decisions. On this test, when something isn’t very clear and you cant ask anyone anything without the fear of getting written up. You are stuck with what you have and are making decisions in a nebulous vacuum.
gemini76 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > >>GIPS - anyone seen this used? << > > Apparently you’ve never responded to an RFP for > new business… nope, again, what does preparing performance reporting have to do with being a financial analyst. when i think of financial analyst i think of equity analyst, fixed income analyst, currency, mbs, etc, analytical stuff, not putting together performance reports. just my 0.02.
so you envision possibly become a portfolio manager one day and not knowing what’s in a GIPS-compliant presentation ? I am not saying that you will have to do it personally, but people under you will assume that you know it all. you’ll hopefully be the ultimate reference for any questions they might have. I know personally, that since I started this CFA program (and specially after L2), anyone with any question in any area comes to me last … If I don’t know the answer, they expect me to at least point them to where or how they can find the answer.
Everyone gets something different out of the program. I use L1 stuff here and there, L2 NEVER and L3 material on an almost daily basis.
Data_monkey, you cant always ask for clarity and more information in the real world. Infact I would say tht in most cases you have to make do with the limited info and time that you have to make a decision. In the real world if you waste too much time getting clarity and information the appropriate time to make a decision would have passed. Even the CFA code of ethics recognizes this situation and is flexible saying reasonable basis, meaning you do not have to turn the world upside down to get full clarity after all nothing is certain.
I think CFAI has to take an objective and a fair view of the issue. The Simplest solution is to jack up the pass rate from 55% to 75% . That would ensure a level playing field for everyone and would be in the best interests of the students.
That would be in the opposite interest of everyone who has passed this test for the last 30 years, as the CFA would become the new CFP.
the only thing that prepares you for the real world is experience and talking with people who have it, not writing an exam. Especially one with a procter checking your calculator with 2 minutes left in the AM session.