Just finished r11 in Quant and man was i stuck. When solving questions i genunely had no idea how to piece together the information to be able to answer the questions on regression analysis. Retakers: does this ever make sense or is it memorization? WHat are everyone else’s thoughts? Im studying from CFAI btw and when i referred to schweser some major points were missing.
I agree. Glad I started studying early.
Regression analysis has to make more sense than just about anything else on the exam. It’s math. It’s not CFAI made-up ethics or accounting rules that change every year. There is serious axiomatic foundation to all the regression analysis stuff (which of course you can’t learn just for the sake of the exam). Anyway, post your questions since this website has a dearth of discussions about real CFA problems.
JoeyDVivre Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Regression analysis has to make more sense than > just about anything else on the exam. It’s math. > It’s not CFAI made-up ethics or accounting rules > that change every year. There is serious > axiomatic foundation to all the regression > analysis stuff (which of course you can’t learn > just for the sake of the exam). Anyway, post your > questions since this website has a dearth of > discussions about real CFA problems. +1 If you don’t get it, just go over the chapter again. 1st time retaker here, and it flowed much better the 2nd time through it.
If you want to be a financial analyst, you need to know regression analysis. If you don’t want to know regression analysis or think it is “jibberrish”, why are you even studying for these exams?
hahaha, hey thommo77. obviously she’s just venting her frustration and it helps to get through these situations knowing you’re not alone. she obviously used the word “jibberish” to mean that regression analysis isn’t an easy topic. she’s just venting… just like you’re venting right now by taking your frustrations out of sungirl27… except she’s doing it in a normal way, a way to get feedback and help from others, you’re doing it in a douchebag way.
thommo77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If you want to be a financial analyst, you need to > know regression analysis. I’m not sure that’s right. I know regression analysis really well (Ph.D. - Stats) but I’ve only used it a handful of times as a financial analyst. It was much more useful working for EPA, the Army, the Navy, and other places.
Can’t add much. Read and Re-read the chapters on stuff you are still fuzzy on after working the EOC problems. Then work the EOC problems again. You might even consider investing some money into one of the study package products. I’ve used ‘the schwez’ in the past. It’s sometimes helpful to hear and see the material presented in different ways. Then work the EOCs again. Pretty much just Rinse and Repeat I’m afraid.
thommo77: read what friggit had to say Friggit: thanks for having my back… im actually enjoying the solving part but the reading goes over my head, i slightly remember bits and pieces from college calculus but thats it. Good news is CFA EOC ask u so many detailed questions that each add a piece of the puzlzle, by the end of the questions all ur dilemmas are gone, BUT need to practice more for retention. I have done half of R11 Q’s and leaving half for May… Hope you guys are doing well
Same here I find it too complicated I skip to Economics.
Hey Sungirl27 keep your chin up. This stuff isn’t easy!!! I was also pretty confused throughout the reading but doing the problems helps a lot. Just keep putting the time in.
Thank you 
you too and G’Luck!
sungirl27 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I have done half of R11 Q’s and leaving half for > May… do not understand the above… when you have made some progress, understood half of it as you say, doesn’t it make sense to finish the other half… you never know what you might be upto in May. (and how deep in which other part of the material). Suggestion - finish it once now, completely, and revisit on your second pass.
Thanks you’re right, my point was worried that i wont have enough questions to solve in may since i didnt not order schweser Qbank and only have EOC
With quant it is all reps. If you are struggling with it, i would say finish it and move on to something you’re more comfortable with. When you review, it will probably make more sense. What you might want to try is to really understand the definitions (heterosk, serial correlation, covariance stationary, etc) so when you are looking at the actual calculations you can intuitively begin to understand what the numbers are telling you rather than just memorizing calc, because i remember they will ask one or two questions that require you to know what they measure and how to interpret rather than to just calculate. Keep your head in it and you will be fine.
sungirl you have plenty of time to go through the EOC’s twice. That is my strategy. I’m going through all of them now after reading and then killing that at finquiz.
thanks everyone very helpful
L3 candidate here. The quant section was really small this year. And with nearly everyone I met, it’s either you know it or you don’t. But it’s actually very straightforward when you sort it all out neatly. Once it’s clear in your head, the questions will look like a joke, and you’ll definitely be sure you nailed it.
What helped me last year was to create my own ANOVA table with the formulas and a small explanation for each output. It really helped me to see where all the inputs came from and how they related to each other. Below the actual table I added in some major terms like Heteroskedasticity, Serial Corr., Multicolinearity, Mean Reversion, etc. I defined each, what they resulted in, their tests and fixes, and general notes. I can still remember that the Durbin Watson test is invalid for use in testing for serial correlation in a time series b/c the dependent variable is a regressed version of the indep. var. - I never would have remembered that if I hadn’t read it about 20 times! and I never would have read it 20 times if it wasn’t on my note sheet. I think this is the only way I could have learned the regression stuff as it was presented in a very abstract way in the book. In my opinion.
FinNinja Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What helped me last year was to create my own > ANOVA table with the formulas and a small > explanation for each output. > > It really helped me to see where all the inputs > came from and how they related to each other. > > Below the actual table I added in some major terms > like Heteroskedasticity, Serial Corr., > Multicolinearity, Mean Reversion, etc. I defined > each, what they resulted in, their tests and > fixes, and general notes. > > I can still remember that the Durbin Watson test > is invalid for use in testing for serial > correlation in a time series b/c the dependent > variable is a regressed version of the indep. var. > - I never would have remembered that if I hadn’t > read it about 20 times! and I never would have > read it 20 times if it wasn’t on my note sheet. > > I think this is the only way I could have learned > the regression stuff as it was presented in a very > abstract way in the book. In my opinion. good stuff…may have to do that myself