Essay 1 Portfolio Management - Individual 20*-- 2 Portfolio Management - Individual 19–* 3 Equity Investments 17 *-- 4 Economics 15 *-- 5 Portfolio Management - Institutional 16-*- 6 Portfolio Management - Institutional 16–* 7 Fixed Income Investments 11*-- 8 Portfolio Management - Asset Allocation 15-*- 9 Portfolio Management - Risk Management 15-*- 10 Portfolio Management - Monitor&Rebalance 19*-- 11 Portfolio Management - Individual 17-*- Item Set Alternative Investments 18*-- -Economics 18–* -Equity Investments 18-*- - Ethical & Professional Standards 36–* -Fixed Income Investments 36-*- - Portfolio Management - Individual 18–* - Portfolio Management - Performance Eval 18–* - Portfolio Management - Risk Management 18–* Essay Q# Topic Max Pts <=50% 51%-70% >70% 1 Portfolio Management - Individual 20 - * - 2 Portfolio Management - Individual 19 * - - 3 Equity Investments 17 * - - 4 Economics 15 * - - 5 Portfolio Management - Institutional 16 - * - 6 Portfolio Management - Institutional 16 - * - 7 Fixed Income Investments 11 * - - 8 Portfolio Management - Asset Allocation 15 - - * 9 Portfolio Management - Risk Management 15 - - * 10 Portfolio Management - Monitor&Rebalance 19 - * - 11 Portfolio Management - Individual 17 - - * Item Set Q# Topic Max Pts <=50% 51%-70% >70% - Alternative Investments 18 - * - - Economics 18 - * - - Equity Investments 18 - - * - Ethical & Professional Standards 36 * - - - Fixed Income Investments 36 - * - - Portfolio Management - Individual 18 * - - - Portfolio Management - Performance Eval. 18 - * - - Portfolio Management - Risk Management 18 - * -
It’s really not even that close of a comparison…
The top exam matrix had 100 minutes (or 27.8% of the exam) below 50%, 117 minutes (or 32.5% of the exam) between 51 - 70, and 143 minutes ( or 39.7% of the exam) higher than 70.
The bottom exam matrix had 116 minutes (or 32.2% of the exam) below 50%, 179 minutes (or 49.7% of the exam) between 51 - 70, and 65 minutes ( or 18.1% of the exam) higher than 70.
(assuming i did my math right) #didn’tcheck #ohwell
I agree with you Would You Look…
Don’t seem close at all.
Why does this matter?
Shall we expect a gap between passing and failing scores? Technically, there’s only one point between passing and failing. Livin on the edge; aerosmith.
I would say the first result this guy did a pretty poor performance in the AM… I calculated his 40/60/80 matrix and he got around 47% while the second guy scored 58% in the AM a better result than the first one…
However, the first guy did very well in the PM with 60% of topics scoring above 70% his results suggest he got around 70% in the PM (conservative side)… While the second guy seemed to have the same performance as the AM with 58%. I would say Ethics played a very well in determinng a pass or fail for both of them but seems both are in borderline and same overallperformance with 1% difference
1st Result: AM (47%), PM (70%) = Average 59% - I would say this is a pass!!!
2nd Results: AM and PM 58% = Average 58%
No guys, it’s not that easy. Second was a pass, but first was a fail. So you see in this case, neither ethics adjustment applies nor 40/60/80 rule. Now you can reverse your analysis.
silver lining - MPS around 60%
I saw those results earlier ethics isn’t the key here! I think it is morning session that would draw the line!
Is it reasonable to think that there is a (possibly different) MPS for each half of the exam, and if you don’t pass on both parts, you can’t pass the exam (or something of that nature)?
personnaly, am even wondering if there are not different MPS per regions, depending on numbers of participants and potential charterholders.
^^that’s the conspiracy… imagine how many people miss MPS by a few points… it could be the difference of 1000 charterholders per year. You have to assume that CFAI wants to promote the designation outside of just US/Canada where the majority come from
…or maybe avoid to have a higher concentration in a certain region.
We as candidates worldwide deserve transparency in this pass/fail mystery process!!! I’m sick and tired of CFAI telling us to be so transparent with our clients and then turn around to act in complete secrecy and have a complete lack of respect for candidates, their “clients” who pay for their extravagant expenditures and salaries.
I believe this is true, perhaps even a handicap for non-native English speakers.
If this is true and CFAI is setting different pass rates for different regions, we need to know. This is way too much tampering with the results. I can see them doing this, controling for supply depending on projected demand for the Charter by regions.
All this time, we thought there is only ONE MPS, maybe there are multiple MPSs in very narrow ranges of each other but the impact would be huge in the Pass/Fail for candidates worldwide.
It would explain why it takes them so long to grade the darn thing. A very good theory.