Already trying to befriend him 
Yeah, I’ve heard this before and it makes sense. I’ll have to really practice this and get it down cold before exam day.
I’ll throw my hat in with this answer too. I’d say the difficulty went from a 5 or 6 to a 7or 8 - nothing that isn’t manageable. I definitely spent more time on L2, but based on my score matrix and the number of questions I guessed on, I most likely did quite a bit better in L2 than L1. This is probably due partially to the fact that I work in an unrelated field and don’t have a finance undergrad, so L1 was likely relatively more difficult for me than for others.
Even if you were, I wouldn’t consider the exams to be any sort of dragon, beast, monster, or whatever other vicious thing someone might think to call it.
Again, I’ll say this is for L1 and L2, since that’s all I’ve taken.
And, if we’re being technical, we should note that a 5 to a 6 isn’t a 20% increase in difficulty, since this is an interval scale… 
In my opinion level 1 is a 4/10 and level 2 is a 9/10. I’ve failed level 2 twice now and the difference between level 1 for me is the room for error on a topic by topic basis. Level 1 is very broad and if you miss a couple questions its not a big deal, but with level 2 if you get an item set you’re not prepared for those points can be hard to make up later on. The questions they’re asking are so narrow and detailed that to me it’s much much harder than level 1. I have a friend that passed level 1 first try, took 4 tries on level 2 and then passed first try level 3. He’s told me in his opinion he thought level 2 was by far the hardest. The key with level 2 is practice practice practice. This time around I will begin mocks, EOCs and BBs in January and I will do them all until I know how to do every single question on every single mock
Anything and everything you need to know will be in those L2 books. So if you remember the stuff from L1 that is repeated or built on in L2… awesome! If not, it’s in there to re-learn for you.
Even with the FRA book. There is a one (two?) pager at the beginning of CFAI book of the ratios you should know. And to be honest I probably only remembered one third of them, and didn’t study or attempt to re-learn those before getting into the readings. You’ll do enough practice problems along the way that they’ll just start to come back to you.
This is just my opinion but going back to any of the L1 curriculum is not only a waste of time, but you’re taking up precious brain space for stuff that won’t even be on the L2 exam.
I think you exaggerate a little level 2 exam. If you pass level 1 you will pass level 2 also. All you need is to learn. I’ve looked at Schweser 3 book - equity. I’ve read half of it in few days. Big portion of material is just a revision of level 1 exam. Maybe questions format is little different but anyway - if you remember topic areas from level 1 , a significant portion of level 2 exam is just a revision. Additionally if you have a finance background from your university and you like that branch of science you will probably pass level 2 and level 3 if you put some effort into it. That’s my opinion.
With all due respect, according to your status you haven’t yet passed a Level II exam, so you really don’t have first-hand knowledge about what you’re discussing.
When you pass Level II, your opinion will carry a lot more weight.
What do you mean? He read half of the Schweser equity book!
LOL
How can you even make a statement like this without having taken it? Equity is really similar yes, but everything else is harder (except ethics).
“Level 2 is less broad”… Ha!
Much of the material at Level 2 was interwoven between different books and methods were often repeated (but you needed to work further into each topic), unless I’m missing a huge part of the curriculum…I saw more disconnect in the Level 1 material (making the curriculum more broad and less easily grouped) than at Level 2. You could easily find quant in most of the books in one way or another. Equity, CF, and PM had significant overlap as well. I specifically remember reading some of the same topics in different [CFAI] books (how it’s introduced and then applied to this “new” setting).
It kind of makes sense, too. As you move closer to the real world, these things are less compartmentalized. The program (in my understanding) builds a foundation and helps you bring it to a synthesized application.
I still disagree with a caveat. I have a background in finance, so L1 was *mostly* topics I knew about. Perhaps they were more broad but I knew a lot of them. Sorry, I think L2 was very broad and very deep where I’d say L1 was just broad (and I still think less so, but I see your point). My point was, and I did a poor job of communicating it, if you think L2 isn’t a broad test, then you’re doing it wrong. Perhaps L1 is a little more broad – again, I don’t think this to be true – but not much more so. Of course, I passed L1 in 2013, so things may have changed.
Good luck. You can do it.
Makes me feel a bit better about the comprehensiveness of L2. A few weeks off from studying non-stop and the last thing you want to do is start studying again. Now its been about 2 1/2 months and I feel like the longer I put off studying, the weaker I get, and the stronger Charlie gets. Ok, that’s a movie reference for those of you who like war movies. In all seriousness, thanks for the feedback. I’ll enjoy the rest of summer and get back at it by October 1. Only reason I considered reviewing L1, was because a professor who teaches the CFA classes in my city recommended it. I’m sure it will come back to me in time.
Hahaha, i don’t know how this information will help you but if L1’s difficult is 6, i will say L2 is at least 24?
I think L2 is just as braod as L1 so i don’t think your expectation is justified.
L2 is not necessarily the hardest of all 3 exams but definitely harder than L1. I think it’s an exam that really challenges the candidates and eliminates the ones who are not dedicated. L2 requires actual studying (rather than common sense and experience). Though previous courseworks help, but remembering everything on the day is the challenge.
BEST OF LUCK
NANA
I have a(n) (academic) finance background as well, but it appears we have different opinions regarding Level 2.
Well, how exactly would you say I “did Level 2 wrong”? I’m not trying to be argumentative-- I’m genuinely curious about your logic here.
Curious as well…