# The correct method of using 40/60/80

Just wanted to say this: for those who passed, congrats! see you in L3. For those who failed, hang in there guys! Don’t give up. I know exactly how you feel. Failing right now only heightens the joy of passing the next time around. Anyways, I was just thinking about it yesterday night and realized that maybe the 40/60/80 rule we use is wrong. This is what’s stated as the weight buckets in the results: Alternative Investments 18 Corporate Finance 36 Derivatives 36 Economics 18 Equity Investments 72 Ethical & Professional Standards 36 Financial Statement Analysis 72 Fixed Income Investments 36 Portfolio Management 18 Quantitative Methods 18 However, we all know that we got a disproportionate mix of questions, infact, a search on this forum gave me the exact questions that appeared on the test. Shouldn’t we be using that as our weights? Alternative Investments 6 Corporate Finance 12 Derivatives 12 Economics 6 Equity Investments 24 Ethical & Professional Standards 12 Financial Statement Analysis 24 Fixed Income Investments 12 Portfolio Management 6 Quantitative Methods 6 If you notice, we got 4 equity and 4 FSA questions. For those who’re wondering how they failed using the normal 40/60/80 rule, maybe you can try using the data above to re-calculate the score. Here’s how to calculate the 40/60/80: multiply the weight of each topic by 0.4, 0.6 or 0.8 depending on which bucket the asterix was in for that subject, obviously using 0.8 for a asterix in the >70% category. Feel free to refute the above, and sorry if this was already mentioned earlier on… I’m too lazy to go through older posts.

I think both cfasuccess and manuhack handle that correctly, and manuhack even gives the exact max/min rule too.

aren’t the % weights the same? or is my math or understanding off???.. i think if you multiply the second list by 3, you get the same #'s… and i’d just add. 40-60-80 is so general to start with. i wouldn’t be looking for too much precision.

westbruin Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > aren’t the % weights the same? or is my math or > understanding off???.. i think if you > multiply the second list by 3, you get the same > #'s… > > and i’d just add. 40-60-80 is so general to start > with. i wouldn’t be looking for too much > precision. Yeah, devsathe it is the same thing.

actuaryalfred Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think both cfasuccess and manuhack handle that > correctly, and manuhack even gives the exact > max/min rule too. I totally agree with you. I just figured out yesterday that, say 70% category, the possible weight is 5/6(83%), or 9/12(75%); but for 50%-70% category, the possible weight would be 1/2, 4/6, or 7/12