GIPS 5.A.1 c Number of Portfolios

CFA Level III
#1

Apologies if this has already been covered (couldn’t find it) but Schweser states less than five portfolios in the composite, and no need to list the number. CFAI says less than SIX and you don’t need to. One of them is wrong and I can guess which. I checked online and there was a revision made in 2006 which would explain it. Are these guys at Schweser on crack?

#2

<6 = <=5

#3

That much, fortunately, I do know. Read above - “Schweser states LESS THAN five portfolios” for exclusion. CFA states “SIX OR MORE portfolios” for inclusion. What happens to that lonely 5?

#4

jpd, it is errata. it should be LESS THEN SIX or LESS OR EQUALS TO 5

#5

There is errata on one of them. csk is correct.

#6

OK cheers mate. Great, another erratum from those guys that hasn’t been posted online yet!

#7

it is posted online

#8

Can’t find it - do you have a link? I’m looking here; http://www.schweser.com/online_program/notes_updates.php?show_book=5

#9

check CFAI errata

#10

So how many is it? Does this also apply for dispersion?

#11

yes, for dispertion too

#12

I have checked - the CFA erratum just supports their assertion on p.312. Schweser and CFAI still disagree.

#13

5A1 on p.184 of Schweser is wrong, it was copied from the old GIPS standards, which I think says “less than 5”. The latest GIPS standards has corrected that and changed that to “5 portfolios or less”. It seems like Schweser has not updated the copied 5A1 accordingly. So to conclude, it should be “<=5”, or “>6”

#14

Thanks, Sticky. This just back from Schweser; “Thank you for bringing this error to our attention. We have determined that the paragraph should read “less than 6 portfolios” but have decided not to post an update on the Errata Reporting section of the webpage since it is unlikely that you will be tested on such specific information (the question will most likely have this as a given), but a note has been made to ensure that these changes are made for the printing of next years’ books. Thanks!” So there we have it.

#15

^Wow it would take 2 seconds to add to Errata and they wont, classic.

#16

It’s ludicrous. As if it’s a red herring?!

#17

This is going to be like TB from last year… ( Level 2 I mean)