Of the people who claim to pass 3/3 in 1.5 to 2 years, how many: 1) Work more than 55 hrs; 2) Are in the investment profession-front office roles 3) Work on wall street or comparable in other parts of the world This number, I think, is small and I would consider these people very hardworking. Am not considering personal reasons as everyone has their own priorities in life. With all due respect to the others who do it 3/3, which is an achievement, I would not consider it as something special while evaluating the intellectual aptitude of the person.
>70% in all sections of all levels is much more impressive than 3/3, IMHO. If you barely squeak by and pass each level 3 for 3, what’s so impressive with that? I also think that passing with a full plate (family, children, full work load, etc.) is equally, if not more, impressive - even with a fail or two or more. Each person has their own battles, that aren’t necessarily comparable. What was that section in the L1 curriculum about nominal, ordinal, interval, and ratio scales?
Have you guys even experienced people asking you how many times it took to pass? I have been interviewing a ton and not once have I gotten this question. I would never ask someone as I think it’s just a dumb question. Passing 3/3 doesn’t really tell you anything since everyone’s lives outside of the CFA program are very different.
sid3699 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Of the people who claim to pass 3/3 in 1.5 to 2 > years, how many: > > 1) Work more than 55 hrs; > > 2) Are in the investment profession-front office > roles > > 3) Work on wall street or comparable in other > parts of the world > > This number, I think, is small and I would > consider these people very hardworking. > Am not considering personal reasons as everyone > has their own priorities in life. > > With all due respect to the others who do it 3/3, > which is an achievement, I would not consider it > as something special while evaluating the > intellectual aptitude of the person. It’s a catch 22. Those who have front office positions and work a lot of hours don’t need the charter. Those who have back office positions and have plenty of spare time need the charter to get into the position of those that don’t need it.
Who is better? Someone in a front office finance position and fails the test a few times or a non industry person that passes the test in lesser tries? The front office person deals with the material or some of it at work and fails. This person doesn’t have to study as hard, because he knows some of it already. However, this person might not have enough time to study, because he’s in the finance industry. The non industry person is learning this for the first time and passes the exam. I would assume that the hiring manager would assume that if you fail level 2, 3-4 times and fail level 3, 3-4 times that this candidate has trouble learning things quickly or retaining it. Would that be a good assumption in some sense? But of course I’ve haven’t been in this situation, so I wouldn’t know. I guess they don’t ask you how many years did it take you to get the charter. But what if they did, would you lie?
sid3699 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Of the people who claim to pass 3/3 in 1.5 to 2 > years, how many: > > 1) Work more than 55 hrs; > > 2) Are in the investment profession-front office > roles > > 3) Work on wall street or comparable in other > parts of the world > > This number, I think, is small and I would > consider these people very hardworking. > Am not considering personal reasons as everyone > has their own priorities in life. > > With all due respect to the others who do it 3/3, > which is an achievement, I would not consider it > as something special while evaluating the > intellectual aptitude of the person. ========================================================== 1) Work with a sell- side brokerage house ( 75 hrs a week) 2) Front office roles -> yes ( an research analyst) 3) Working on Dalal Street ( Indian Equivalent of Wall Street) went on for 3/3 in 21 months lol does that make me a better analyst? After thinking about it , 3/3 is something which more of style and less of substance , it adds nothing ( as compared to 3/6 etc) but people just feel good talking about it,
former trader Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > sid3699 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Of the people who claim to pass 3/3 in 1.5 to 2 > > years, how many: > > > > 1) Work more than 55 hrs; > > > > 2) Are in the investment profession-front > office > > roles > > > > 3) Work on wall street or comparable in other > > parts of the world > > > > This number, I think, is small and I would > > consider these people very hardworking. > > Am not considering personal reasons as everyone > > has their own priorities in life. > > > > With all due respect to the others who do it > 3/3, > > which is an achievement, I would not consider > it > > as something special while evaluating the > > intellectual aptitude of the person. > > > It’s a catch 22. Those who have front office > positions and work a lot of hours don’t need the > charter. Those who have back office positions and > have plenty of spare time need the charter to get > into the position of those that don’t need it. The CFA charter will boost your career not open new doors like a MBA from a good school. To get you foot in the door networking and being at the right time and right place is the key. The charter will not help here.
CFA_Werewolf Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > sid3699 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Of the people who claim to pass 3/3 in 1.5 to 2 > > years, how many: > > > > 1) Work more than 55 hrs; > > > > 2) Are in the investment profession-front > office > > roles > > > > 3) Work on wall street or comparable in other > > parts of the world > > > > This number, I think, is small and I would > > consider these people very hardworking. > > Am not considering personal reasons as everyone > > has their own priorities in life. > > > > With all due respect to the others who do it > 3/3, > > which is an achievement, I would not consider > it > > as something special while evaluating the > > intellectual aptitude of the person. > > > > ================================================== > ======== > 1) Work with a sell- side brokerage house ( 75 hrs > a week) > > 2) Front office roles -> yes ( an research > analyst) > > 3) Working on Dalal Street ( Indian Equivalent of > Wall Street) > > > went on for 3/3 in 21 months > > lol does that make me a better analyst? > > After thinking about it , 3/3 is something which > more of style and less of substance , it adds > nothing ( as compared to 3/6 etc) but people just > feel good talking about it, It doesn’t make you a better analyst, but it shows you are very hardworking, which is what most employers want. Unless you are medically retarded, there is nothing that hardwork cannot achieve. Intelligence is overrated, in my view. It has been my experience: the harder I work, the luckier I get.
CFAdummy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Who is better? Someone in a front office finance > position and fails the test a few times or a non > industry person that passes the test in lesser > tries? The front office person deals with the > material or some of it at work and fails. This > person doesn’t have to study as hard, because he > knows some of it already. However, this person > might not have enough time to study, because he’s > in the finance industry. The non industry person > is learning this for the first time and passes the > exam. > > I would assume that the hiring manager would > assume that if you fail level 2, 3-4 times and > fail level 3, 3-4 times that this candidate has > trouble learning things quickly or retaining it. > Would that be a good assumption in some sense? > > But of course I’ve haven’t been in this situation, > so I wouldn’t know. I guess they don’t ask you how > many years did it take you to get the charter. But > what if they did, would you lie? Not always true. My senior analyst had hired an associate right out of undergrad- a psychology major- to work as a research analyst in the financial services group. That person did not no what a debit and credit was. Learnt the concept of time value of money on the job. Two years in the job, my senior analysts, who has been in the industry for nearly 20 years, rates that person very highly. The person was’nt a genius, but hardworking to the core.
I’m disappointed. 2 pages and no Chuck Norris jokes yet? CFA is CFA. Don’t ask, don’t tell on time used during interviews. Last time I checked, CFA on the resume only gets you closer to the interview, during which whatever in your head matters more than how long you took to pass 3 exams.