hala_madrid Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > don´t forget that 35% is pass rate for all level 1 > test takers… if you look at level 1 forum, pass > rate of people registered in the forum is much > higher (there is a lot of >70%)… > > although perhaps this is just a stupid comment > trying to think that “we are better because we > write here and share our doubts / help each > other”, don´t know… I am skeptical of this. I think that a lot of people who pass just take the exam and get on with their lives and never come to forums like this.
sure, is just that I think that average score of this forum´s users is higher than overall average score
proves a point i guess
CFA_Halifax Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I’ve been saying 40% for a while to friends. > Although I admit there is no likely correlation. I > just think their turning Level III into a full > fledged below 50% chance test like LI and II I agree with this more than some of the optimistic forecasts here. I could imagine that there will be a slight increase in the pass rate over last year because of all the retakers from 2007, but I am expecting that the test standards have shifted downwards for good to the 50% range. Here are some of the reasons: --this year they only made the tests from 2005 on available, signaling that the tests before were not relevant. 2005 was the worst year ever before 2007. I look at 2006 as the outlier. --they also raised the standards last year, making a lot of work experience that previously counted irrelevant. That is also a clear signal that the standards are getting tougher. --the AM version of the test sure didn’t feel like they were taking their foot off the gas relative to other years. I don’t see how tightening the standards on Level 3 “dilutes the value of the designation.” I think CFA Institute is proud of how tough the tests are–just look at their marketing pieces. And there’s no sign that they’re just in it for the money–that is, more members, more revenues. I would guess that they are swimming in money as it is and if they did need a quick pop, they would just raise membership dues, which aren’t that high. So my take is: stay pessimistic, stay tough, and be ready for a long haul.
Official study materials made compulsory -----------> Pass rate falling! What conclusion can be drawn from this? A> Official study materials poorly represented actual exam LoS B> Actual exam did not represent the official study material. C> Candidates were deceived by studying the actual material, whereas exam was set from Schweser and other study notes providers. D> CFAI randomly selected 35% from 3 choices between 30%, 35%, and 40% based upon random 1000 with replacement draws last week held by examiners at the Institute. Answer: Unknown!
eastwest Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Official study materials made compulsory > -----------> Pass rate falling! > What conclusion can be drawn from this? > > A> Official study materials poorly represented > actual exam LoS > B> Actual exam did not represent the official > study material. > C> Candidates were deceived by studying the actual > material, whereas exam was set from Schweser and > other study notes providers. > D> CFAI randomly selected 35% from 3 choices > between 30%, 35%, and 40% based upon random 1000 > with replacement draws last week held by examiners > at the Institute. > > Answer: Unknown! E) A, B & D are correct. C is incorrect because the exam was not based on anything (see answer A).
Mr. Tambourine Man Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > --this year they only made the tests from 2005 on > available, signaling that the tests before were > not relevant. 2005 was the worst year ever before > 2007. I look at 2006 as the outlier. That’s one way to look at it. How relevant do you think the 2004 and before exams are? There is likely to have been significant changes in the material (I don’t know). > --they also raised the standards last year, making > a lot of work experience that previously counted > irrelevant. That is also a clear signal that the > standards are getting tougher. Non-sequitor. This is not related to the difficulty of the exams. > --the AM version of the test sure didn’t feel like > they were taking their foot off the gas relative > to other years. Yes, ouch. > I don’t see how tightening the standards on Level > 3 “dilutes the value of the designation.” I think > CFA Institute is proud of how tough the tests > are–just look at their marketing pieces. Agreed. And > there’s no sign that they’re just in it for the > money–that is, more members, more revenues. I think they are in it for the money. If CFA were truly a non-profit entity, there would be no reason to pay the CEO (or whatever his title is) seven figures a year. They would also charge just enough for the exams to offset the cost of administering them. If you think about it, CFAI has a great business model. They charge people an arm and a leg to get through a course of study that they could essentially do on their own for 1/10th the cost (see: amazon.com used books or your local library), and then they charge charterholders annually for the pleasure of maintaining the stamp of approval. > So my take is: stay pessimistic, stay tough, and > be ready for a long haul. Pessimistic? That’s a given!
Here is my $0.02. The designation is becoming diluted because of chumps like me; everyone and their mother takes this now. They want to keep it open but they’re gonna make every test harder and the work experience longer and more applicable. That being said, I definitely buy into the “people on this site will have a higher pass rate” theory. Not because we are necessarily smarter, but because we probably put more time in. Also, the people who post their sample exam scores are probably a bit better than the average forum user. Thus, if you were getting average or above average exam scores compared to people posting them on this site, my prediction is you will pass. I may even look back at some early June posts to prove my point when results come out on Aug 20.
farley013 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > aic Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I agree. If you look at historical pass rates > for > > all three exams, there is really no > correlation. > > > > > http://www.cfainstitute.org/cfaprog/pdf/candidate_ > > > results.pdf > > Has anyone ever run the correlation analysis on > historical pass rates? I’d be interested in seeing > exactly what the value is. I just did a very simple regression starting 1993 and the correlation between LI and LII is about 65%. The predicted value for this year’s LII pass rate is 42%. LIII has near zero correlation; however, by shifting the data 4 years, I managed to get a correlation of 0.5. Using that, the predictive value for this year’s LIII pass rate is about 62%.
CFAI is all about making money. They want you to purchase their textbooks and pay outrageous sums for writing the exam (btw, when did “taking” the exam become “writing” the exam?). They have shown that by lowering the pass rate, they have actually increased the value of the designation and more people than ever are taking the test. What if the pass rates were 35%, 35% and 50%. Would that impact the number of people sitting for the exam? I doubt it. It might even increase the number of people sitting for the exam. Everyone thinks they will go 3x3. Yet, if the pass rates were lowered to 20%, 20%, 20%, I bet the number of people sitting would fall. Where is the equilibrium?
Data mining!
They have to make it harder to pass. More people than ever are taking it. I’m sure they make bank, but they’re a natural monopoly more or less. What do you expect?
JacksonSF Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > CFAI is all about making money. They want you to > purchase their textbooks and pay outrageous sums > for writing the exam (btw, when did “taking” the > exam become “writing” the exam?). When you are a silly European.
I think the pass rate for L3 will be higher this year. It usually pops up after a low pass rate in the previous year. You generally have a more talented candidate pool. The 2007 L3 fails (retakers) are extremely motivated, and the L2 passes are pretty serious candidates – they made it through a tough 07 L2. The pass rate may not be as high as it was in 06, but I would expect it to be in the 60s. jlf, CFA
> The designation is becoming diluted because of > chumps like me; everyone and their mother takes > this now. Man, I really hope you’re wrong about this. Maybe people are just down after getting roughed up by the test this June, but I personally am expecting that if I ever get the charter, there is going to be a very clear payoff and if someone says, “dude, everybody and their mother has the CFA, go to the back of the line,” I am going to be seriously pissed. I went to very good schools, so I am used to intense academic programs, but I have really been sweating this thing over the last few years (perhaps because I studied liberal arts). Compared with getting into a top MBA program – which I did and perhaps foolishly turned down – I think this program is much tougher to get through. So I am going to be seriously disappointed if the designation doesn’t turn out to be a difference maker. One day… Who knows when…