I took the level II exam in Boston today. I found that the multiple question session was pretty much at the same level in terms of difficulty as the September Level I exam. I finished the afternoon session in 80 minutes, which surprised me a bit. I kept looking for more questions. The essay questions were pretty straight forward and I was able to answer them in 5 or 6 sentences. Overall, it was an easy exam.
I studied for 10 weeks (150 hours) using the official textbook and the Schweser Qbank. It was more than enough. I recommend the textbook as a reference for those that wish to be in the field.
How did you find the L2 material in comparision to L1? It looks dry and tedious on first glance. Did you consciously try to remember the facts/research articles for the essay topics, or would general logical answes suffice?
I thought L1 material was more interesting than L2, but I found the level of difficulty comparable. L2 is more qualitative than L1. Personally, I found the essay section pretty easy and thought they didn’t ask for any obscure details.
Good Point Wianek on the qualitative part. In your essay answers, did you quote any research papers, percentage historical annual returns etc, or did you just answer them as per general financial theory, and common sense?
You don’t have to quote any specific papers. Two or three sentence answers based on general financial theory and common sense are sufficient. That’s what I did and I scored outstanding on the essay portion. I honestly thought the essay portion was easier than the multiple choice, but maybe I just lucked out on the topics.