Whether the exam held twice or once in a year, it would still require considerable effort to pass, only that one stands a chance of doing so faster; so I am a bit unclear as to the meaning of “effort” in this context.
Simple questions, dear Sir: does having the Level II exam twice in a year make the EXAM any easier, and if so, how? And does waiting for a whole year to resit the exam also qualifies as an “effort”?
Just because something has already been done does not mean it is immediately okay to do it again in a different setting, and Level 1 is not the same as Level 2 a point that has been done over more than enough in the forum.
And I agree faster does not mean easier. But this is not a question of faster. If you want to complete the program faster, work hard and don’t fail.
This is a question of how many bites at the apple you can have in a given time period, more bites = easier.
As to a shortage of CFA charterholders, you are right it is conjecture on my part. Conjecture based on what I see in my local job market. This is also the effect of Experience > CFA. There is no shortage of experienced financial professionals in my local market, and as we all know the CFA Charter does not make you a better investor than someone who does not have the charter.
At the end of the day we all have free choice, if you don’t like how the CFA exams are structured I suggest you take a look at the Certified International Investment Analyst (CIIA) exams, it covers broadly the same material as the CFA and you can sit all the exams every six months. Even better the subjects are separated, so no mixing fixed income and dertivatives with equity and financial statements.
Of course depsite covering the same material it does not have the same stature as the CFA, but you can finish it quickly and it’s not plumbing.
It makes the exam easier to pass…doesnt mean easier content wise…but if youre given multiple chances in short periods of time then it becomes much easier than having to wait a whole year.
Brainy, you are right the exam does not become easier in of itself, but once you increase the opportunities the course becomes easier as you have an increased opportunity to succeed.
This should be apparent to anyone who has paid attention to quantative methods.
I would suggest that the CFA Institute’s duty regarding the CFA program is to manage the program in the best interests of our clients, members of the institute and candidates. It is clear why it would be in the interests of candidates to be able to sit level 2 twice in any year, but I do not see the benefits for either clients or members.
As an aside, take a look at the level 3 forum, I don’t think you’ll see any threads demanding additional opportunities to sit exams.
Interesting…your first point was to “protect the client” but now your argument appears to be self-dealing. Whatever man. For the record, like I’ve said before, I think I passed this time and would feel the same way next month, regardless of my result. I’d like to think I’m more principled than simply caring about what’s best to me. And, to be honest, I don’t think offering another L2 test would explode charterholders (much like the expansion of L1) – I simply don’t.
Once I obtain my charter I hope they switch level II and III to once every 5 years . I spoke to a charterholder who stated it simply, when you are in the process of obtaining the charter you hope the % of people passing is high, when you finally obtain your charter you hope no-one ever passes again
No, it doesn’t… Stop trying to be dismissive when you don’t know what you are talking about. As per my initial comment: “Also, I’m not sure your point holds, “possibly faster” doesn’t always equal “easier.” If they made the test to where the fail rate was 80% (or pass rate 20%) but allowed the test two times a year, the path, in aggregate, would not be *easier*.” If you paid attention to quantititave methods, you’d see this example would make the path “harder,” not easier. But my initial point holds – don’t throw out throwaway lines if they are not correct.
Well, then stop responding to me… Especially to make demeaning comments. If I’m silly, why are you coming into the L2 board to address me? If I was a CFA Charterholder, I’d not come into the L2 board unless I’m there to help answer questions for candidates. Not to argue with them about testing times. Just a thought. Why are you here bro?
Dude this has been beaten to death. L1 is twice a year because people go in to see what it’s like, go in unprepared and/or bec their company pays for it so why not. L1 twice is a big money maker that anyone can sign up for who can pay $$. It makes total sense to have it 2x a year.
This is evident in the fact that L1 is far EASIER than L2 and yet the pass rate is still LOWER.
I’m not being dismissive. I was making the point that increasing the frequency of a test will inevitably increase the frequency of an event at the same level of probability.
I would also be against the idea of making the exam harder at the same time as testing twice a year. I guess your idea is to maintain the overall difficulty. The point of the CFA exams is to ensure a certain minimum competence in Charterholders and I think they do a good job as they are.
i’m sorry if you don’t want to hear what I and other Charterholder have to say on the subject, but that fact in of itself is not in favour of your argument.
You have made a fine point of why it is in the interest of candidates to have addtional level 2 exams, but I have heard no arguement as to why it is in the interests of either clients or of members of the Institute.
As I already mentioned when I was a level 2 candidate I was against the idea of addtional exams. I hope to see you in the future arguing in favour of additional exams as a Charterholder. Because those of us who are Charterholders are here becasue we continue to have an interest in the exam process.
Personally I continue to feel strongly about the importance of the CFA program and for me that involves not only helping candidates where I can, but also contributing to discussions about the program in general.
Of course if all we are doing is arguing I’ll wish you good luck and suggest that you direct your efforts to writing a letter to the CFA Institiute outlining how you think they should change the examination process.
It’s been made clear to you that adding a December L2 session makes the charter easier to obtain thus diluting the value of the charter…so it affects all candidates and charterholders…not just L2 candidates so everyone should be commenting here. Also, you are not a CFA charterholder so don’t hypothesize what you would and wouldn’t do.
The challenge of the entire LEVEL becoming too easy by virtue of having the EXAM twice in a year can be easily handled. Simply make the exam questions harder and/or jerk up the MPS! That’s it.
Jerking up the MPS or making the questions harder both stave off the potential CFA charter dilution effect (as worried about by the opponents of this idea). I sincerely do not see why this idea is not workable, really. Waiting one whole year to resit an exam is just too long, uninspiring, and demotivating. I will constantly insist.
Benefit to clients: A better pool of charter holders for clients and employers to draw from. No benefit beats having the right to CHOOSE. If you disagree with this point, then it means you are only paying a lip service to your client’s interest advocacy statement.
Ramos, you seriously need to devise other civil and polite means of expressing your displeasure. Openly calling another person silly is just dishonourable and disrespectful! I would suggest you take a course on the usage of figures of speech, with particular emphasis on satires and sarcasms.
I’ll say again, difficultly depends on who you are. For someone not working in finance more study hours is not a problem, but for someone who is working it may be. Having the exams less often helps to ensure its mostly people who are already working in analyst-type finance jobs.
Making the exams harder and more often may cancel out, but it may also be the case that the only people taking it are those without a job.
Again, I’m not saying just cause you don’t have a finance job you deserve to suffer, but CFAI has to be considering what the reputation of the CFA is, is it a practitioners exam or a students exam.
The specific knowledge is only part of the value of the CFA, signaling commitment is huge, and it shouldn’t be ignored.
I am against the change - I want the designation to mean something and be very difficult to obtain. I have co-workers who got the CPA certificate when it was one test (not 4) and think it is ridiculous how much easier it is now to get. I have also talked with CPAs who are CFA candidates that say the CFA exam is much harder, specifically due to quantity of material and the time needed to obtain. I know the CPA is a more widely used designation (and I do believe it has merit); however, the fact that it is easier to get may be one reason why we see significantly more CPAs than CFA Charter Holders. It has been said a million times before, the content in the CFA material is not the challenge, it is the quantity of material and penalty for failing that makes it so hard. In the end, the less people with the designation (due to difficulty, time needed to acquire, etc.) will strengthen the designation.
. I spoke to a charterholder who stated it simply, when you are in the process of obtaining the charter you hope the % of people passing is high, when you finally obtain your charter you hope no-one ever passes again 