Took Level 3 almost a week ago and overall found the CBT experience to be okay. In the past, I liked to check the forums for sentiment after the exam. For Level 1 (2018) and Level 2 (2019), this has been pretty consistent across forums and candidates (e.g. everyone felt it was super hard, or AM was a bit harder than PM or vice versa, etc.).
This time, however, there seems to be a huge dispersion among candidates that have taken Level 3.
Why do you think this is so different? Because the questions are drawn randomly from a pool now with CBT?
Seems like either the AM was difficult and PM was easy or vice versa. For me, the AM was difficult and sometimes pretty far away from the Syllabus. On the other side, the PM was a breeze with 1 hour left to double-check everything and to make sure to uncover most of the traps. It seems strange to me that the time constraint and difficulty varies so much between the AM and PM (compared to the Mocks and previous year’s exams). Coming back to my original point, it’s also strange to see that there is so much variation among candidates. I wonder how CFAI will grade this fairly but I’m afraid we will never find out how (if) they do it.
For reference, I scored around 60-70 on the AM Mocks (MM and 2017/18 exams) and 70-80 on the PM mocks (Boston Mock PM was 79 for example).
Given the strong performance in the PM, I feel it’s a coin toss, which is the feeling that most seem to have. I’m not sure if CFAI wants most candidates to walk away from the exam thinking it’s a coin toss. Eventually, I believe this could undermine the integrity of the exam.
Let me know your thoughts.