Felt ok about the AM coming out of the exam but could’ve easily scored anywhere between a 55% and 75%, which is a huge range. Hard to tell how they will grade partial points, particularly on a few tougher calculations/item sets where I was on the right path but am not sure if I brought it all the way home. I finished with about 20 minutes to spare and started to review but only got through 2-3 problems with minimal changes.
PM was tough, I felt surprisingly ok about ethics (never know) but the remainder was extremely challenging in my opinion. I think min was 31/32 right, max was low-mid 40s (depending a lot on ethics and a few 50/50s). Like others, I thought they presented a lot of PM problems in new ways or with nuances that led to gameday errors due to fatigue rather than a lack of preparation. This was highly frustrating as I reviewed my answers and realized some 5/6 questions I got wrong that were well within my wheelhouse. Only 2 I had no idea how to approach. Finished the PM with about 40 mins left, was able to review my answers and classically changed 1-2 from wrong to right and 1-2 from right to wrong, net 0.
Overall on the fence about it all. Good luck to everyone, thinking perhaps more people felt this was generally a more challenging exam than than some posts would imply.
Imagine if the L3 pass rate was 35-40% instead of 50%. I keep telling myself “cmon bra alls you gotta do is be better than the guy sitting next to you. You can do this!”
I have a feeling that the pass rate will be 52%-53% compared to 56% last year.
The PM was unusual in terms of style and language.
Felt level 2 was much more straightforward last year.
At the end it really depend on the candidate efforts and his/her ability to master concepts. Whoever passed level 2 and 1 because their strong quantitative skills will definitely find level 3 very challenging.
Moreover, i feel that the last 10 days review attributes at least 10% of the total score. Most candidates practice questions rather deep diving into the material trying to recall it all, which i find it an ineffective strategy.
Wow, this was brilliant. I agree so much that I can even relate.
I devote so much time to dive deep into the concepts. And the more I learn, the more I realize how much I don’t know. And even in the last review days, I still think that I know so little that I do not even have time (or want?) to practice mocks! So I keep focusing on the concepts, even on my way to the exam center
But a few years ago, I came to know this quantitative guy (engineering background) on the job. He was just the opposite; a know-it-all that managed to pass CFA Level I & II. From there, he knew-it-all so much that he failed Level III twice before quitting in 2016.
Don’t get me wrong. No matter how many failures, anyone that strives to improve his knowledge is worthy of respect. But this was certainly not this guy, since he knew-it-all already. To him, it was the fault of the CFA program (and of the essay part, “unfair for non-native English speakers”).
And yes, last year’s 56% passing rate was also ridiculously high, which can explain the unusual structure of the exam we had this year (for both PM and AM!)
That’s pretty funny - especially since if you venture anywhere else on this forum outside of the designated study spots, it’s nothing but people just shitting on the CFA program.
Brother if you think some of the half witted comments on these sub threads is a representation of the CFA program jokes on you. I’ve worked with more than a few I’m-the-man dudes over the years whose careers went down the toilet because they couldn’t get out of their own way. Nobody cares how much you know because no amount of knowledge can predict the market with certainty. Here’s some career advice: don’t be a dick and you’ll be alright.
Wait are you directing this at me? I’m just saying there’s a lot of people out there (apparantly), that say the charter means jack sh|t, and discredit us for even thinking of doing this.
No wasn’t directing at you at all… just pointing out that most of the people saying it’s worthless are likely the blow hards that I mentioned. No shortage of know it all fellas with the charter who can’t get ahead. But it isn’t because of the charter.
^I think that’s exactly right. Fair or unfair is irrelevant, obviously the CFAI can ask about anything covered in the curriculum. They are very clear on this point. More relevant question is whether the exam should reflect the weightings of the curriculum? To me this is a big YES, after all the goal here is to educate and train professionals in those areas CFAI deems most important and relevant. To have the exam not reflect the weighting of the curriculum isn’t unfair, but it is a bit unsatisfying, and leaves me wondering what was the point of doing that.
I find the way the curriculum is designed is amazing and far more interesting / practical than level 2 and level 1. If you’re passionate about portfolio/wealth management , it will get you there . If you’re not in portfolio management, it will teach how to invest smartly and accumulate wealth for retirement or any other purpose. The process and frameworks are superb. I would say it kind brainwash you in away to become a capable wealth/ portfolio manager.
My gf asked me if I could put my folders/books/notes in the closet as I would not be needing them anymore…replied that no can do since I don’t want to jinx it.
Also, not wanting to toot my own horn but I have made some stellar notes during the past 3-4 years. They come at handy sometimes at work.
