PM - any sectional score >70 should either be 83.3 or 100 (5 or 6 right) and 50-70 is 66.6 (4 right) except in ethics where it could be slightly diff. [The Min-max takes into account the same]. So guess if you have many >70 in PM your score would have been higher than what 40/60/80 suggests… I estimate my own PM is a min 78% to max 93% range. whereas 40/60/80 would estimate my PM at 76%.
The data <50 and >70 is at best sketchy and could be quite misleading. As some one pointed out, i could have scored closer to 0’s in few sections in AM. The Bands capture the effect of both these extremes. Quite surprised that the prep providers are not adjusting the estimates to the Bands.
Am I missing something here. 54% pass rate for Level III this year and 300h estimates your %ile to be 33. Something not right in the 40/60/80 analysis.
the 33% is of the data they receive in their database - essentially very heavily skewed toward those who pass as those who fail are seldom checking their 40/60/80 scores.
Was last year in a similar situation - failed band 7… What I checked 2 days before exam was the video on yahoo finance of the CFAI exam development director, who explained how they grade it. I did not finish the AM, left ca 2 questions open - however what I answered was correct… Best of luck next time