so how'd it go?

I don’t believe I got it wrong either, even the band you wrote isn’t the same as mine. Maybe there were different questions testing the same concepts after all.

I think there are different verisons of the exam regionally (ie North American exam version questions are in a different order than Australian version) but everyone in the same region writes the exact same version of the exam.

Yep. Wiley’s 11th hour guide was amazing.

I went to the exam without having done as many mocks that I think I should have done, did only 3mocks of 6topics, now I say thanks God I didnt do CFAI mock. I felt AM very easy and PM a bit harder. I felt the exam was very easy except few questions in PM,FI,Der. AM ethics I felt like I got 6/6, whereas I found PM ethics difficult and there’s really no guarantee of ethics whatsoever. FRA is my strongest area, I felt it too easy and I dont believe to have made any more mistakes than 2 or 3 max. Equity was easy also, but it depends how many of us remembered formulae that were exactly needed. Corp Finance, another stronger area of mine, it was easy, BUT, there were 3 or 4 questions that required multistep calculations and would be really tough for “average” candidates. Quants, I felt it easy but again it depends whether you remembered needed formulae and concepts. Economics, my weakest and I am 2/6. AI, was ok except 2 difficult questions. Portfolio, I had to guess 2 out of it. FI in AM was easy but was difficult in PM because the itemset that came wasnt explained in detail in schweser. AM derivative was just ok, PM derivative was hard with the last question seemingly to have no correct answer no matter how hard you try it. I finished AM 35minutes earlier and PM 15minutes earlier. I dont remember to have seen so many tricks or traps and felt exam very easy, maybe I really did bad on exam or maybe some of you guys are just making us scared about traps that werent there, time will tell. If I get band 9 or 10 I will want to commit suicide because of 3 questions I did wrong because of silly mistakes and they were from my strongest area, I cant really stop worrying about them and hate myself for it. Having said all that. I think, saying exam was easy or hard depends on how well you were prepared for that particular question that appeared in exam, if you knew it you will say it easy and if you dont know it you will say it hard. I hope I pass this exam God willing.

Your overall stance is confusing. It was too easy, so you don’t think you passed? Not trying to be a Richard here and call you out, but you must see your post is semi(mostly)-illogical. Saying things like “it would be a disgrace not to get a 100% in quants” can also be off-putting to fellow AF guys that struggled there (and rob you of those Karma points you apparently need). In addition, it generally falls outside of the conservatism analysts typically pride themselves on. Personally, I think the fact they can test on so much makes the exam difficult – even if it’s straight forward.

I guess what I’m saying is respect the exam and your fellow AF-ers, especially if you don’t even think you passed. That’s like Seattle saying New England is easy to beat (if you’re not in the US, that’s a Super Bowl reference). Or that’s simply my two cents, feel free to throw them down the wishing well. Hopefully you accept this minor criticism in the spirit in which it is given. For the record, and I understand you should ask this of me, I too feel the test was straight forward (sans ethics) and I expect to pass but understand it was difficult for many – I applaud all who committed the 300-500 hours necessary.

This is exactly how I feel.

Hilarious.

I feel like if you were doing calculus then that’s your problem right there. I’ve never encountered any calculus whatsoever in the curriculum, other than the occasional off hand “such and such is the derivative of such and such” accompanying an equation.

On a different note, the room I wrote in was super hot. I was really, really close to passing out about halfway through the AM. I was so pissed that I might fail because I can’t stay conscious, especially since I felt like I was doing really well.

All of CAPM, regression and any formula for that matter that can be graphed which is bascially every formula in the CFAI is calculus related! There is only one formula in the CFAI text that can not be calculated properly.

I think his point was that the curriculum doesn’t require you to use calculus, much less does the curriculum cover it. It certainly helps to know it, though.

so some of us were under by 5-6% and some were over by 5-6% … Is that just a giant coincidence or are there really alternate versions of the exam? Does anyone remember the form number that was on their test? I’ve always thought if there are alternate versions that that is why they make you verify the form number on the booklet is the same as the bubble sheet

I guess there were multiple questions over this.

And I found none of them fairly valued. Two were very close to being fairly valued but were not.

And, that 5% margin shud be on intrinsic value, not market value. So, you had to apply 1.05 or 0.95 factor to market value before checking for it. if for example, 30 is MV and 35 is intrinsic value, you shud apply 0.95 factor to intrinsic value to check if 0.95 times intrinsic value is more than Market Value or not., not the other way round. It maynot give the same results.

Accept your criticism in the spirit it’s intended.

But, I think I made my point pretty clear - which is, the exam was easy but because I didn’t practice well enough to recollect some key concepts during the exam. I can see where you’re coming from but I’m sorry, I’m not the one who’se going to pretend (even if I made mistakes) that it was difficult when it wasn’t, just to falsely make myself believe it’s ok to fail the exam, when it’s not.

If the exam was hard, I wouldn’t feel embarrassed like I do right now for not completely owning it, but it wasn’t and it was totally gettable. I simply refuse to join the the group which goes on to blame the difficulty level for not passing. Call me too critical or harsh but you can’t call me immodest because I’m open to admit my embarrassing screw up and honest about the fact that failing would have nothing to do with exam’s difficulty level.

And by no means am I trying to make anyone feel bad - just trying to keep it honest, so I/we can learn and do better next time.

PS: Too bad I can’t quote specific questions to prove my point :slight_smile:

Don’t you mean the PM session? It was a derivatives topic that needed some multi-step maths.

Calculus cud hv been involved in AM session, not PM one. I still feel, there was no need to have so much calculus, as it was solvable simply by comparing “those two” items. There was substantial difference in one of them

It was a derivatives question, question #120, there was simply no correct answer in the choices.

If it was Question 120, i guess it was a straight forward one. It had the correct answer-

We may have had different sessions. It was in the ‘difficult’ session, mine was the PM. I remember reading a couple here thinking the same as well.

Exactly, I wanted to bang my head into the wall for.not being able to get the right choice. I finished PM 15 mints earlier and just fought with this question for all that time but couldnt get it right. I thought I was doing something wrong and was cursing myself for it after the exam. Now I feel relieved after knowing that everybody felt the same about it.

But here’s the thing, there are two ways you can solve this.

One was provided by the CFAI official texbook, and the other by Schweser if I remember corectly, so there may have been differences in rounding. But I have to check that statement when I get home.