Schweser has it simplified down. Finquiz’s Econ section is very difficult.
Which part of Econ? I found the stuff in the beginning pretty easy (i.e. the CCY stuff). The stuff on FX Forwards stuff is okay. The part at the end is what I found quite impenetrable (I think it was policy stuff, can’t even remember).
Note, I was using Schweser only/
Currency translations in Schweser is easy (I dont know if currency translation still belongs to level 2 though)… Especially the triangular arbitrage was beautifully explained in Schweser. But finquiz fails miserably here.
You are right, Economics for me is always the toughest Hey, but I end up getting 70+ in that somehow commensurate with the effort I put in that
Hey Sooraj, Econ for 2013 is totally different from Econ for 2012
Thankfull it doesnt matter to me anymore mate I struggle with economics always
At least Econ is fairly short compared to L1 which went on forever.
I agree CleverCFA… Level 1 economics for that 5% weightage was easily the most difficult of all the topics for me. Not even FRA came close and I didnt even know A = L + E when I started CFA FRA :))
L1 Eco was, I thought, extremely difficult. Never did get my head around most of the micro stuff. L2 Econ, in comparison at least, seems no sweat based on the Schweser Notes. Just depends on how your individual mind works and your individual background I guess.
L1 eco was 10% man
I don’t find level 2 economics that difficult. The only tricky part for me is those related economic theories: classical, neoclassical … especially neoclassical theory which contains a lot of formulas that can boggle your mind. However, it is very simple in Schweser. In addition, the practice problems after the reading do not ask anything about such tricky formulas. So, I am thinking whether or not they will not test us with those sophisticated formulas but instead, test us on how we understand the theories. If it was the latter, it would be very fine for me.
Read corp. finance and stats, just began econ and i’d have to say i agree. Schewser has divided into 3 sections. Currency and all of the first section was easy. Just finished economic growth (section 2) and I am completely lost, which is sad because I learned about Cobb Douglas function in a course in college but what you don’t use you forget
Yes!! CFAI material and Schweser is night and day. It also doesn’t help that the whole section is completely different than in 2012. If you’re just depending on schweser i’d at least go back and read the CFAI material - probably a section that’s not written as well in Schweser because it’s new.
The thing with Econ is that it’s largely applying theories, and the marginal benefit of an extra hours study is low compared to other sections.
I did an econ undergrad and realised quickly that I had a decent enough grasp on it in L1 to get 60% minimum everytime, but the extra time it would take to truly dominate it was just silly and better spent on other areas.
Haven’t touched L2 yet but after 3 years of econ I feel it is just a subject that has drastically diminishing returns
Schweser simpliefied Econ so much
The CFAI material is no good for Econ. IMHO it is worse than Level I econ which is really a new low for them.
Schweser’s glossed over too much stuff in Econ. They make no mention of the Taylor Rule and there is no explanation for the neoclassical theory. just a few bullets that went right over my head. The CFA books didn’t help me at all so I can’t really blame Schweser. Now I am waiting for Elan to release Econ so I can try their stuff.
True, Schweser has simplified it alot and didnt go through some in depth as in the text book. I guess for eco you cant rely on schweser alone, I am reading the CFA material beside schweser. My major was Economics so It’s not that hard i guess, but it’s taking me forever to finish the 1st reading! I
If you mean Econ is difficult in that it’s hard to stay awake. I concur.
I heard Econ LII was too much wishwash since they changed it. I start studying it tonight…
Level I Econ is challenging, no doubt. Note, however, that the Taylor rule has not been covered in the curriculum since 2011. The new (last year) CFA Econ book is 565 pages (20% of the curriculum pages), and I took that down to a focused 260 pages in the SchweserNotes. In the latest curriculum, the neoclassical economic theory is only mentioned in relation to LOS 18.c, which states “…describe theories of the business cycle.” I explained the important points (in a paragraph, not bullet points) on page 153 of the SchweserNotes Econ book. The neoclassical economists believed that all deviations from full employment are temporary, and that the economy will naturally (and rapidly) return to full employment equilibrium as resource prices adjust. Thus, there is no real neoclassical theory of business cycles, so it therefore doesn’t get much coverage in the CFA curriculum books or the SchweserNotes as a result. It is really just the starting point of explaining the origins of Keynesian theory. Be sure to focus on the Learning Outcome Statements, as they tell you what is “fair game” for the exam. You might also want to join my online class that takes places on Tuesday nights from 6:30 pm to 9:30 pm ET. A great many CFA candidates find that our online, video, or live CFA instruction is a necessary complement to reading the CFA readings and/or SchweserNotes. This is an efficient way to understand and retain the material, and an effective way to keep on track and be successful on the exam. I also answer candidate questions for all the candidates in my class. In closing, I don’t think you could expect to fully understand the material if you took a college course in econ with only the textbook and didn’t attend any of the lectures!
Please refer to page 542-547 of the curriculum. It’s all about the Taylor Rule. I agree that the LOS should be the focus of our learning, but the blue-box examples are hugely important, and in the curriculum, the blue-box example on the impact of Monetary Policy on exchange rates compares the Mundell-Fleming Model to the Taylor Rule.
Please refer to LOS 15i: Compare classical growth theory, neoclassical growth theory , and endogenous growth theory. The curriculum covers neoclassical theory it in a lot of detail and the theory is also talked about in relation to the convergence debate and growth in an open economy.