If the AM questions asks a concept or formula you dont know… youre not getting any points no matter what or how much you write… All the scores <50 are likely (zero)…
Yes thats true!
Those points are reported on a question level where your argument is made on a sub-question level. For a quick example: Say you have a 20 point question with five subparts:
A: 5 minutes – 100% correct
B: 5 minutes – 0% correct
C: 4 minutes – 100% correct
D: 3 minutes – 0% correct
E: 3 minutes – 0% correct.
You’ll get a sub-50% (45%, 9/20), but this is much more than the “likely (zero)” you quote.
Out of the topics you received less than 50, did you think you received some points or get a zero on everytihg. I saw some results from last year where individuals passed with 6 item sets that were less than 50
Youre right… I’d revise my post to (some) of the <50 scores are zero even if candidate “wrote something” BUT-your example is rare for an AM set with 5 subsections and each question worth 3-5 points… TYPICALLY there are 3-4 subsections with 1 of the questions worth a larger portion of the total like “8 minutesi subsection A of a 17 minute full question”… Most AM questions have a “theme” for example… from what I’ve seen going back to 2006… if I am weak at the “micro attribution” theme for question X its likely I won’t get any of the subsections correct… this is the big challenge for the AM exam is the concentration risk which has been mentioned. the subsections are not really independent
I concur my example may not have been the best. Maybe a 20-point question would have four parts: 8 minutes, 6 minutes, and two 3 minute questions. My underlying theme was you could score sub-50% and still have some points versus getting a zero. Or using your 17-minute question example – it’s possible for you to get the 8-minute question correct but miss the other 9 points of questions. In that case you’d get a 47%, which is reported as a sub-50% but still much higher than zero.
Not sure I agree with you that if you’re unfamiliar with the theme you’d most likely get a zero. Take older exams the CFAI has published – you may have missed the 8 minute return calculation for Individual Investors but know a 3 minute risk willingness (or ability) factor.
Not attempting to argue with you my friend (AF has way too many type-A douchebags as is), my point was the OP should not compare not finishing questions to old test results with sub-50% results unless they also say they did not finish 3 questions.
Even last year would not be a good comparison because they had 11 questions – not 10 – so each question this year is worth (a couple) more points. Simply put: Not completing 3 questions of a 10 question test is worse than not completing 3 of an 11 question test.
Could the OP pass? Absolutely. Would I personally expect to pass if I was the OP? No.
Also, micro attribution is easy:
Sector effects are the return the Portfolio Manager earned as a result of overweighting outperforming sectors or underweighting underperforming ones. Logically, think about this before you consider learning the equation. It’s overperformance by overweighting or underweighting a sector (note the manager’s actual return in the sector isn’t mentioned).
Here’s the equation: (Manager Weight of Sector - Benchmark Weight of Sector) X (Benchmark Return of Sector - Total Benchmark Return)
Within sector returns are best thought of as “intersector alpha.” This is the returns of the manager - returns of benchmark weighted by the benchmark.
Equation: Benchmark Weight X (Returns of Manager - Returns of Benchmark)
Last one is allocation/selection which combines both – it takes the first equation of the sector allocation and multiplies it by the end of the within sector allocation. I bolded the equations above, but here it is:
(Manager Weight of Sector - Benchmark Weight of Sector) X (Returns of Manager - Returns of Benchmark). It’s easy to remember because it’s manager minus benchmark on both. I noticed this wasn’t asked often in questions.
30% of AM that is 60 points… unless if you aced the 120 points and assuming you get average 60.5% = 73 points /180 morning ~ 41%
Assuming Average PM 70% = 41%+70% = 55%
chance of pass/fail : I say from 50%/50% to 33%/67%
Last year, I had 7 sections of 11 in the <50% range.
If you can score 48 or something real good in the PM, then that’s not a biggie.
You’re looking to get about 2/3’s of the exam; if you are around there, then it’s possible!
cyrwr1 – please share your matrix? and can i see it as a screen shot?
I dont understand how people can score 80% + in PM and fail (<50% 7 out of 11) in AM… i recognize that its a recuring theme and sometimes blamed on poor writing skills but from what ive seen… there are “enough” questions in AM that are fairly straight forward that these same people should be able to get -apply formula X/ define this buzzword
+1 Lets see that Matrix
Bump…to try and calm everyone down from the August 9th freakout
Nobody has a crystal ball.
You have a good chance of passing because my understanding is if you go to the morning session and write one word you have a chance!
The force is with you.
I’m a magician.
I have.
http://www.crystalballservices.com/Software/OracleCrystalBall/CrystalBallStandard.aspx
Hey S2000. Is that what you used for your Monte Carlo test?
Yes . Passing cannot be ruled out . We need to know the other variables as others said . The accuracy of the 70% in AM and your performance in PM . But i remember having read a blog on a differrent site where she screwed up the first paper but still managed to pass based on the PM.