lol yea ur prob right. He says I’m immature for calling him an idiot then he goes ahead and calls me a failure lol. 2 wrongs don’t make a right. Anyway, I wasn’t actually calling him an idiot, I was saying he would be an idiot if he choose to just completely skip over a section in the FSA book. Given that FSA isn’t even a big book as it is and there really isn’t too much that they can test us on to just skip a whole a section is like ludicrous. Watch, I bet pensions isn’t even tested now lol. Anyway, sorry for indirectly calling u an idiot. Next time I won’t be so harsh Good luck w/ ur studies
I know this is a silly question but what should I focus on Quant? My problem is that im really not good in quant so I take long to learn it and during that same time i could probably review most of the curiculum. To the guy leaving out Econ I wouldnt do that. Its pretty straight forward & could easily be also linked with Deriv. and pm
JP_RL_CFA Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > lol yea ur prob right. He says I’m immature for > calling him an idiot then he goes ahead and calls > me a failure lol. > > 2 wrongs don’t make a right. > > Anyway, I wasn’t actually calling him an idiot, I > was saying he would be an idiot if he choose to > just completely skip over a section in the FSA > book. Given that FSA isn’t even a big book as it > is and there really isn’t too much that they can > test us on to just skip a whole a section is like > ludicrous. > > Watch, I bet pensions isn’t even tested now lol. > > Anyway, sorry for indirectly calling u an idiot. > Next time I won’t be so harsh > > Good luck w/ ur studies No need to apologize for calling it like you see it; I personally agreed with you. Unless you’re well-versed (i.e. have worked in them for years, and even then you’d have to reconcile CFAI “life” to the real world), skipping over topics is a moronic strategy for this exam. Just moronic. But again, that’s just my opinion.
Yes ideally obviously one should know everything. However due to time constraints one has to prioritize. The way I see it is that its useless to know something a topic . You either know it inside out or you do not. A pretty fair assumption is that quant will have 1 item set and maybe something linked to PM which should not be a problem. So from 6 questions the probability is that you would guess 2. So are a maximum of 4 questions worth revising through the other 9 topics in much more depth? Is my logic flawed ? Which should improve my chances of passing most? Are there any low hanging fruit in Quants? Pls help
I just looked over some of the derivative stuff for the first time, in depth today, I might be throwing some of those far-flung formulas out of my memory bank.
> Is my logic flawed ? Which should improve my > chances of passing most? Are there any low hanging > fruit in Quants? > > Pls help Regarding Quant I would spend a bit understanding the Anova table and related testing from it. Honestly its quite easy and it wouldnt surprise me if there are one or two questions that you can answer from using it. Also I dont know why anyone would miss pension accounting. FSA is most probably going to have 4 item sets. Given this you would have to think theres a very good chance pension accounting will be one of them.
Here’s my advice. I’m a retaker and consistently scoring 75-80% on the Schweser practice exams. Review my “What you want to know about…” post regarding pensions, and quant. I wouldn’t worry about the other part, but I would at least learn the basic idea of valuing a forward mid-contract. Good luck, you’re gutsy. Make sure you nail ethics and equity.
Yeah valuing a forward mid and beginning contract is pretty easy, but then I read on to the some of the other things they give in chapter examples for, in options, seems pretty ludicrous
max81 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yes ideally obviously one should know everything. > However due to time constraints one has to > prioritize. > > The way I see it is that its useless to know > something a topic . You either know it inside out > or you do not. A pretty fair assumption is that > quant will have 1 item set and maybe something > linked to PM which should not be a problem. > > So from 6 questions the probability is that you > would guess 2. So are a maximum of 4 questions > worth revising through the other 9 topics in much > more depth? > > Is my logic flawed ? Which should improve my > chances of passing most? Are there any low hanging > fruit in Quants? > > Pls help Yeah dude, your logic is beyond flawed. I wouldn’t really say I knew any topic “inside and out” last year (with a couple of exceptions), and I fucking destroyed that exam (done the afternoon session at like 3:15). They’re not gonna test that many topics SUPER in-depth, so to give up free points that you could’ve gotten by just a cursory review of the material is too silly for words.
I guess the best way to put it is that the vignettes are tiered in difficulty, with a couple easy, a couple intermediate, and a couple advanced questions per vignette. So just by a cursory reading of the material, you get two questions per vignette correct. Add in maybe one or two other questions, and you’ve “salvaged” that vignette. You can live with getting a 3 or 4 on a vignette that covers one of your weaker areas; a 0, 1, or 2 is pretty hard to come back from.
Pensions Investment is actually quite easy, even though its quite hard. Try to find out the very helpful summary thread posted a few days back. In effect you are just supposed to know a few values (funded status, pension exp., economic pension exp being the most important). Personally I am skipping swaps. I am also inclined to skip valuation of private xcompanies (under equities), and valuing target companies in mergers, but I think i will end up studying them…