Any buyside analysts out there considering the CMT (Chartered Market Technician)? I currently work in a fundamental, not quant, hedge fund. I used to believe TA is just a bunch of baloney, partly because of the “rational” (quotes emphasized) market b-school professors that have influenced my thinking over the past 7 years since I graduated. I don’t ever plan to become a trader but I am starting to believe that the knowledge might actually be useful and complementary to more fundamental approach. I am wondering if, all else being equal, a CFA CMT would be looked upon more desirably than an individual who i just a CFA or if the CMT doesn’t really add much. Anyhow, would love to hear thoughts and experiences, particularly from anyone who possesses both a CFA-CMT or is currently pursuing both.
I am taking CMT Level 1 in October. Reasons being a) exemption from Series 86 if you pass Level 1 and 2, and b) learn technical analysis tools for short term trading in personal account
Haven’t considered the CMT but I have been looking at the CMA (link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certified_Market_Analyst) as something I may be interested in doing ex-post CFA. Anyone else look into this designation? The initial requirements seem very high and are what has attracted me (i.e. no little undergrad students sitting for the exams).
evgong Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Any buyside analysts out there considering the CMT > (Chartered Market Technician)? I currently work > in a fundamental, not quant, hedge fund. I used > to believe TA is just a bunch of baloney, partly > because of the “rational” (quotes emphasized) > market b-school professors that have influenced my > thinking over the past 7 years since I graduated. > I don’t ever plan to become a trader but I am > starting to believe that the knowledge might > actually be useful and complementary to more > fundamental approach. I am wondering if, all else > being equal, a CFA CMT would be looked upon more > desirably than an individual who i just a CFA or > if the CMT doesn’t really add much. Anyhow, would > love to hear thoughts and experiences, > particularly from anyone who possesses both a > CFA-CMT or is currently pursuing both. You’re touching on a deep point of debate. Though I don’t have a CMT and nor am I pursuing one, we do have one guy on the equity research team I work on that has a CFA and a CMT. As you likely know, the CFA is much more common in the money management industry. Though I do agree with you that having the CMT may actually be complementary (the more you know the better off you are, especially in this business), its value will likely come down to the culture of the firm and their acceptance of technical analysis. Our MD is big on technical analysis and so the CMT does well here. However, I know that a lot of the other portfolio managers don’t think of TA as highly and so they are more skeptical of the CMT (read: make more fun of him at the lunch table). At the end of the day, it’ll all depend on where you go to work - if they like TA then the CMT will be desirable, and if they don’t it may actually harm you (since the line of thought will be “you obviously believe in TA in order to pursue the CMT”). My conclusion - if you believe in TA, then by all means go for it. If you believe in it, you’ll likely be happiest working at a place that accepts and values TA, and thus the CMT will be of value to you. If you believe in it and work for a place that doesn’t think so highly of TA, it won’t be of any value. But then you likely won’t be happy working there (since they don’t believe in what you do), and so you may end up going somewhere you like.
evgong, would you mind shooting me an email? ptrading1983 at gmail dot com
As a CMT, my answer will be biased, so… Any additional education of any kind cannot hurt. Most firms, openly and not so open, use technical analysis for different purposes, from talking points to looking for better entry and exit strategies on investments. My philosophy has been to use fundamentals to tell you what to buy, technicals to tell you when. There is a very small market for technicians, as “quant” incorporates much of technical analysis in computer modes. So, do the CMT but realize that it will be another arrow in your quiver rather than one big cannon.
Do you know what the “acceptable work experience” is to become a MTA member, rather than an affiliate? It looks like the CMT is a beneficial designation to obtain (even for personal use, if not professional).
C4.02: Eligibility for Member (from the MTA Constitution) (A) Member status is reserved for those whose professional efforts are spent practicing financial technical analysis that is either made available to the investing public or becomes a primary input into an active portfolio management process or for whom technical analysis is a primary basis of their professional investment decision making process. (B) An applicant for Member must have been gainfully employed in a professional analytical or investment management capacity for a minimum period of five (5) years and must be regularly engaged in this capacity at the time of application. The Board may in exceptional circumstances waive the requirement of current employment. The five year period may be waived to three years for applicants who have successfully completed all of the requirements of the Chartered Market Technician (CMT) program. I think “professional analytical or investment management capacity” is pretty broad.
Does anyone know what the exam date is for CMT Level 1 in October 2009?