I hear that a different grader grades every question. If your answer to 1a can be used to build on your answer to 1b. Do you have to recalculate what you did in 1a?
Seems obvious but does anyone know?
I don’t believe that you would ever be asked to answer question X based upon a value derived in question Y. Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I feel like I’ve seen this stated somewhere.
Must only be in this Schweser practice exam I took…
Also, there was a question here: “Compute the relative value over 25 years of bequest versus a gift made this year…”
I know the formula is typically FV(gift)/FV(bequest), I guess because of the way I read the question (bequest versus gift), I decided to put FV(bequest) on top, then I read the answer, they had it the other way… wonder if this is typically okay since in my answer, I stated how I was calculating it… ahh. Essay questions add so much uncertainty.
Just as at Levels I and II, each question is standalone: you never need the answer for one question in another question.
This is not the case, necessarily…
2010 AM Exam Question 5.
5A: Select the two most appropriate corner portfolios.
5B: Determine the most appropriate allocation between the two adjacent corner portfolios selected in Part A.
5C: Determine the percentage that would be invested in Real Estate based on the most appropriate SAA.
Therefore, 5B is dependent upon your answer to 5A, and 5C is dependent up your answers to 5A and 5B.
this is actually a question that is broken down in many parts but most of the time this type of question is bundled into a single question
i was just coming on here to ask basically the same question. theres a question on schweser exam 2 where based on a calculated reqd return objective, you then have to select the approarite corner portfolios and calculate the approriate weight and std dev calcs.
a. calculate return %
b. calculate approriate weights, and std dev
c. if using RF asset calc weights and std dev
i calculated the return figure wrong (part a), but the rest of the calculations (weights based on that return figure, and thus standard devs with those weights) was done right. can i count the points for the right math (i showed work) but with wrong final answers because of the bad inputs?
I also have similar question: How about referring to return calculation question for liquidity requirement answer? Is it fine to just state the total on-going expense amount than re-construct the same thing?
\
According to schweser videos if you make a calculation error in say part A but then carry that error through to parts B & C etc., the grader should give you credit if you did the other parts correctly carrying the error forward.