Over the years there have been many steps in the finance professional supply chain that have resulted in a sort of "grade inflation" in finance. The CFA is not one of them.
A lower percentage of candidates passed the first test of the Chartered Financial Analyst exam, a three-step process aimed at gaining a hiring edge as job losses accelerate in the financial-services industry.Thirty-five percent passed the initial test, down from 39 percent last year, the CFA Institute said in a statement today. Almost 50,000 people took the exam in December, a 25 percent increase from a year earlier, the Charlottesville, Virginia- based institute said.
For reference, the pass-and-remain rate for the SEAL program Physical Screening Test used to be 34%, before that got candied up and pushed to 40% in the last few years. (Is nothing sacred?) The drill instructors at the CFA Institute will have none of that, thank you very much.
"Since it's a self-study program, it's hard to say why pass rates increase or decrease," institute spokeswoman Kathy Valentine said in an e-mail.Candidates take the exam betting the certification can become a path to better jobs, higher salaries and a deeper understanding of finance. The not-for-profit CFA Institute recommends candidates spend at least 250 hours studying for each phase of the test. It costs about $2,500 to complete all three levels, which are given in June and December.
Did you fail? What was your major malfunction? Which segment of the creed did you blow? Ethics? Tenacity? Rigor? Analytics?
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:10PM
Not sure why i bankers would need the CFA.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:12PM
@1 you're right, the dumber the better
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:12PM
Not sure why we need i bankers
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:17PM
1 For no other reason than in this job market it can't hurt to be among the 35% that have on their resume "passed Level I".
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:19PM
CFA = wicked super lame
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:22PM
I snuck in long ago... must have been easier then
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:24PM
I passed with 70%+ in all subjects.. anyone else achieved the same feat this in todays results ?
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:24PM
I passed with 70%+ in all subjects.. anyone else achieved the same feat this in todays results ?
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:24PM
http://www.nypost.com/seven/01272009/entertainment/insecurities_market_152149.htm
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:25PM
When I took the exam in the early 2000s, the pass rates for Level 1 was in the 30s then too. So this year's sounds about right.
Also, there's about a 12-15% chance you make it through the whole thing in one shot.
Posted by Cincinnatus C , Jan 28, 2009 12:25PM
#3 made me lol.
i passed level III in 2001. that year's test was unreal. they bumped up the pass rate to 82%.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:25PM
yep, I passed with the same results.
Posted by merkin capital partners , Jan 28, 2009 12:25PM
too ethical, didn't Satyam
Posted by Cincinnatus C , Jan 28, 2009 12:25PM
#3 made me lol.
i passed level III in 2001. that year's test was unreal. they bumped up the pass rate to 82%.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:25PM
Failed. Can I have my grand back?
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:26PM
wow, that is a shocker. I just passed all three levels in 2008. Glad to be done with that.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:27PM
haha nice one #10
wesley snipes paid a visit?
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:29PM
I'd expect the pass rate to fall further considering how many more people are taking the exam
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:32PM
I passed with 70%+ in all subjects.. anyone else achieved the same feat this in todays results ?
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:32PM
I passed with 70%+ in all subjects.. anyone else achieved the same feat this in todays results ?
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:32PM
"Since it's a self-study program, it's hard to say why pass rates increase or decrease," institute spokeswoman Kathy Valentine said in an e-mail.
Kathy Valentine is an idiot. The pass rate declined because the number of people taking the test increased.
The larger the candidate pool gets, the more marginal candidates will be in it. Duh.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:34PM
I passed with 70%+ in all subjects.. anyone else achieved the same feat this in todays results ?
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:35PM
@17, one shot as in your first time taking each exam as opposed to failing any one of them...
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:36PM
Whay you need now is the CFC. Sweet Fuck All is ok, but if you are not certified financially correct your Thained. i.e. Davos is not financially correct this year.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:40PM
Nail the CFA. You still won't be able to actually DO anything.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:42PM
"I passed with 70%+ in all subjects.. anyone else achieved the same feat this in todays results ?"
Great. Now maybe you can learn how to leave a comment just once.
And yes, I passed with over 70% in all subjects too. You are not a special snowflake.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:44PM
The choice of whether or not to do the CFA is sort of like the fable of the squirrel and the grasshopper. The squirrel works hard all summer, building his house and laying in supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks he's a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the squirrel is warm and well fed. The grasshopper dies out in cold.
Posted by american bandersnatch , Jan 28, 2009 12:44PM
Great picture; reminds me why I love you. But shouldn't it be Pyle, not Joker?
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:44PM
there is clearly a flaw in the test if the pass rate is so low. people aren't learning the material correctly. the curriculum is a convoluted bunch of crap that could be consolidated and presented in a much easier and clear way. they overcomplicate things intentially to maintain a "prestigeous aire" Perhaps the financial industry is collapsing because we have overcomplicated things to the point of diminishing returns.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:45PM
why do people think a CFA is more valuable than an MBA...
Posted by american bandersnatch , Jan 28, 2009 12:45PM
@29 - Extremely funny comment, although presumably unintentional.
Posted by Anal_yst , Jan 28, 2009 12:45PM
@21
The voice of reason has NO place here.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:46PM
why do people think a CFA is more valuable than an MBA...
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:47PM
@29 clearly you failed Level 1
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:47PM
The CFA does not prepare you for a job in finance, but an MBA does. CFA is merely for show anyway.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:49PM
Passed on 125 hours of study. Suck it, CFA recommendations.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:50PM
@21 Although number of ppl taking the exam is likely a factor, it's probably trumped by the difficulty of the exam. CFA exams (like most exams) do vary in difficulty, and the institute made a conscious decision in the early 2000's to make it more difficult to obtain a charter (i.e. exam changes + increase of min work exp from 2yrs to 4yrs + narrower scope of acceptable work exp.
Level II and III pass rates have more variance than Level I because of the item set exam structure. The low number (20) of item sets ensures that only some topics are tested, and sometimes create huge differences in difficulty. It's not so much trend, just stochastics...
Posted by HAM05 , Jan 28, 2009 12:51PM
the reason the passrate is so low is because asshats like me think they can put in a week and pass.
in this case pawn3d and fail.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:54PM
@33 ... well to start, it is cheaper .. hehehe
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:56PM
@29 - the problem is with the candidates, not the test. You sound like every other piker who is in over their head and complains that it's a faulty exam.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:57PM
@37, agreed. Clearly CFA Institute has a policy of keeping as many people from getting the credential as possible and thus raising the prestige of the credential. There was a breadth of material that touched on almost every single finance topic you can think of, but then the test would drill into the details. And then it was a hit or miss as to whether or not the stuff you knew was on there.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:57PM
I passed the CFA...big f-ing deal. The exam is a crock. BUT it does show the ability to stick with something for multiple years until you reach the goal, and there's a lot to be said for that. Neither the CFA nor the MBA prepare you for dick. If you don't have the ability to think for yourself, and can't process information coming at you from all angles, you will not be successful in investing. Being able to regurgitate something taught to you for an exam, or while getting your MBA will not help you.
Warren Buffett would tell you the same thing I'm sure - although his photographic memory sure helps him.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:58PM
All I know is Ethics was hard as shit.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:59PM
I have an MBA from a top tier school and a CFA and can vouch that an MBA says nothing about your understanding of finance (especially if you went to Harvard) but you can't pass level I of the CFA without a solid comprehension of the basic tenets of finance.
Pass rate is so low because it isn't easy. It isn't the hardest thing in the world but it does require a solid understanding of numbers and a large element of self-motivation. On the contrary, B-school is easy.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 12:59PM
on to level II for me.
though it should be noted that while December 2007's results may have been 39%, in June of this year the Level I pass rate was also 35%
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:01PM
29 is an obvi fail.
21 is absolutely, 100% correct
and its closer to 8-9% chance of making it all the way thru on first shot.
35 is malinformed
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:03PM
Oh well. I guess I'll go be a lawyer.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=agfjWe9ZN25Y&refer=home
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:05PM
Gunny Hartman said it all - "If you ladies leave my island, if you survive recruit training, you will be a weapon. You will be a minister of death praying for war. But until that day you are pukes. You are the lowest form of life on Earth. You are not even human, fucking beings. You are nothing but unorganized grabastic pieces of amphibian shit. Because I am hard you will not like me. But the more you hate me the more you will learn. I am hard but I am fair."
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:05PM
don't let this happen to you.
http://endofesq.com/?p=931
Posted by NAS Keflavik boi , Jan 28, 2009 1:06PM
"For reference, the pass-and-remain rate for the SEAL program Physical Screening Test used to be 34%, before that got candied up and pushed to 40% in the last few years. (Is nothing sacred?)"
Nothing about BUD/S has been "candied up" in the last few years. You are misrepresenting what "pass and remains" means. A few years back 34% of BUD/S candidates that had a sat PST score at the start of the training completed the course. Now that figure is about 40%. It just means that more sailors are starting the training up to standards, and accordingly are lasting the entire program.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:07PM
Failed Level II the first time, but it didn't matter so much because of the 4 year work requirement. Level III was easier than II. Looking forward to enjoying outdoor drinking and not having to study all April/May this year.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:08PM
Hooyah NAS Keflavic boi!
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:08PM
@43
Don't sweat it. Ethics always have and always will be a detriment to making it in finance.
Don't think of that section as what you would do but should do. No wait, that is too confusing. What the SEC thinks you should do, no wait, they don't actually care. What you should do if you think you might get caught before bilking enough to retire. No wait, no one ever thinks they will get caught.
Oh never mind.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:14PM
Ethics = cya. Tell someone about the problem (your boss) and disassociate yourself from the unethical a-hole. Now it's your boss' problem.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:14PM
@43 - I truly don't mean to offend, but if you think so than perhaps you need to go do something else. I got above 70%. Full disclosure - I didn't pass.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:15PM
@40, let me hit you over the head with my W2 and we'll see who's the piker....
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:16PM
I would assume that many of the smarter people who had been planning to stick with careers in finance, have changed their plans over the past year or so, leaving the pool of CFA exam-takers disproportionately populated by less-smart people.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:17PM
@55 - You're funny.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:23PM
CFA = "If you can't trade might as well analyze". I told my CFA neighbor in early June 2008 that I was buying ultra short ETF's - he said "what stock is ETF?"
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:25PM
#27- Wasn't it the ant and the grasshopper? Where did the squirrel come from?
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:26PM
Don't tell me that EP was a Navy SEAL also...
Posted by Anal_yst , Jan 28, 2009 1:27PM
@ 62
If there is a god, within a matter of minutes...however, since indications point to that not being the case, I'd say he's more-or-less immortal, sigh...
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:28PM
pledging, hazing, and banging whores - that prepares you for banking about as much as a CFA
though, if you have a cfa, you probably think markets are efficient, which means you're destined for mediocrity
and what's with getting banned from posting?
Seaman Bodine
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:31PM
@61 +1
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:33PM
I learned a LOT from doing the CFA, and since I'm passionate about my work it was almost all very interesting stuff. On the other side I look back at it fondly, and definitely pay attention to how junior people react when they pass/fail. You learn a lot about a person.
I am always impressed by the commitement of people who stick to it after they fail. But if they fail more than twice, I am definitely not impressed :)
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:38PM
@63
Have to disagree. pledging, hazing and especially bangin' hos is much better preparation for banking.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:38PM
@ 27 & 60
Wasn't it the grasshopper and the octopus?
It's just like the story of the grasshopper and the octopus. All year long the grasshopper kept burying acorns for winter while the octopus mooched off his girlfriend and watched TV. Then the winter came, and the grasshopper died, and the octopus ate all his acorns and also he got a racecar. Is any of this getting through to you?
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:41PM
Level 1: Pass
The table below illustrates your subject matter strengths and weaknesses. The three columns on the right are marked with asterisks to indicate your performance on each question or topic area.
Multiple Choice
Q# Topic Max Pts 70%
- Alternative Investments 8 - - *
- Corporate Finance 20 - - *
- Derivatives 12 - - *
- Economics 24 - - *
- Equity Investments 24 - - *
- Ethical & Professional Standards 36 - - *
- Financial Reporting & Analysis 48 - - *
- Fixed Income Investments 28 - - *
- Portfolio Management 12 - - *
- Quantitative Methods 28 - - *
Posted by Rahodeb , Jan 28, 2009 1:42PM
I heard a rumor that some chick in the midwest somewhere failed the level 1. It's such a cakewalk of a test I'd imagine she'll probably go into hiding or something.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:43PM
In the first few years, the pass rate was over 80% to establish the brand. Now, the pass rate is 35% to protect the brand. If you can't see that this is a rigged game, then the CFA designation is not going to help you.
http://www.cfainstitute.org/cfaprog/pdf/candidate_results.pdf
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:44PM
@65 :-(
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:54PM
@35 CFA alone might not prepare you for job in finance, but it WILL give you a foundation to potentially develop real investment talent with some on-the-job experience.
An MBA will only prepare you to trick naive people into giving you money when you have no idea how to invest it. Perfect for something like a Madeoff FoF.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:56PM
Is the test difficult? Yes; is it impossible? No! I put in 120 hrs and passed. I majored in finance and accounting, I can truthfully say, there was not one concept on level I that I had not seen before. Doesn't mean I knew them all before I studied. There is a shit load of material yes, but it's doable. Anyone who actually reads the CFA books is a dumbass. Schwesers are all you need.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:58PM
In this economic environment, is it more advantageous to have and MBA or CFA....which title do employers value more.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 1:59PM
Every quarter we seem to have the same debates; CFA or MBA. The CFA doesn't teach one to see bubbles before they burst nor the instruction to buy low and sell high. Buffett doesn't have a CFA and he seems to have mastered the most basic finance rule out there. The rest of it is all bullshit that eventually craters after bubbles pop.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 2:00PM
Is there any correlation between how many take the exam and how fucked the economy is in the same year? Looks like there is.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 2:03PM
14 Thanks for that, I guess. I also passed LIII in 2001, but never realized the pass rate, at 82%, was so out of whack. I believe that was the first year they introduced the multiple choice fact sets at that level. After doing well on I and II and preparing well for III, i remember finishing III and thinking i had failed miserably. Now I see - the test was obviously flawed, so they gamed the results.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 2:06PM
#30: I theorize that there are a huge glut of MBAs who paid a ton of tuition, but a scarcity of CFAs, who must pass a challenging series of tests. That is why the CFA is more attractive, relative scarcity. Same thing applies to Victoria Secret Models (top 1% of the popuation) vs. obese Americans (34%).
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 2:06PM
The only people who fail MBA programs are the those whose tuition checks bounce.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 2:11PM
when is dennis kneale going to die?
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 2:12PM
Failing more candidates not only benefits the CFA Institute intangibly by fortifying their brand, it also lines their pockets when those failed candidates pony up another $700 to retake the exam. That exam is a bigger scheme than the awards-show racket.
Oh, and posting your score here from an exam that 1 of 3 people pass shows a lot about more about your need for external validation than your career prospects.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 2:13PM
@ 78 There is absolutely no scarcity of CFAs dumb ass.
There is an enormous glut due to the 10k plus mutual funds in the US all populated with bottom-up CFA analysts, that have consistently proven that they can't beat a passive benchmark over the long-term.
Where do they have an obsession with CFAs? Dodge & Cox, Turd Avenue, Davis Funds, Legg Mason funds. I guess being down 50% in 2008 is a testament to the skill of CFAs.
CFA= losers who can't trade, analysts who have to much time on their hands as they work a mutual funds.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 2:14PM
Pass w/ about 90 hours of studying... who the hell needs to study 250 hours for this test? aside from ethics, the rest of it was a complete joke. i didn't touch several topics until the night before the test..... spent about 80 of those hours on goddamn accounting.... stupid liberal arts education
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 2:15PM
CFA is for douchebags that can't get into PE or IB. Or trading, or hedge funds . . .
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 2:18PM
@79
True, but I assume attending a top tier B-School and specializing in Finance is not a walk in the park. I'm sure you acquire good tools and not to mention good brand/exposure. "Anyone" can get a CFA but still must conduct job search on his/her own; whereas an MBA is almost a guaranteed job and more respect on a domestic and international platform. HBS Alum vs. CFA holder with a Bachelor's Degree from 2nd tier Undergrad institution (not knocking 2nd tier undergrads)? HBS wins any day.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 2:18PM
@74
Prove that you can close clients and you won't need either one.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 2:29PM
when did stevie cohen and jay goldman get their mba's and cfa's?
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 2:32PM
I know a lot of top-tier MBAs and a lot of CFA charterholders. IMHO, the MBAs are typically smarter and more engaging, but I would say the CFA charterholders probably did work harder in getting their credentials. It's all a crock anyway. Why would one need either to be successful in finance (other than getting a "union card" to get into the business in the first place)?
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 2:38PM
i heard it is because people born in the 1980s are much dumber than people born in the 1970s...
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 2:50PM
passed
financial world is getting smaller, hating won't help you.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 2:54PM
@90 -- financial world is getting MUCH smaller, having CFA probably won't even matter unfortunately.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 2:56PM
I passed the L1 in December on the first try. I was a Poli Sci and Philosophy double major. The satisfaction of having zero finance background and still passing is phenomenal.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 3:03PM
Getting into a top MBA program is hard. Graduating once you're in is ridiculously easy. CFA requires mastery of financial knowledge. There are plenty of folks who get into HBS with non-traditional backgrounds, only take required finance courses, and barely know a stock from a bond by the time they've graduated because they've spent two years partying.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 3:08PM
I passed the L1 in December on the first try. I was a Poli Sci and Philosophy double major. The satisfaction of having zero finance background and still passing is phenomenal.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 3:12PM
Ethics is hard because its an entirely abstract concept in finance
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 3:13PM
@93 -- "mastery of financial knowledge" is going too far. A (young) CFA charterholder asked me about the duration of a zero the other day. There is no substitute for experience.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 3:14PM
$$$$$ track record > CFA > MBA
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 3:15PM
@27 Junk in the Trunk?
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 3:22PM
too "would be" not enough "would-be"; didn't read.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 3:23PM
@21 and everyone who agrees; there is a fundamental of mathematics you don't understand.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 3:26PM
It's not the MBA or the CFA that makes you a better analyst/investor/trader/whatever. They only make other people think you are better.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 3:29PM
@ 8 = douche
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 3:46PM
94 Good job. What you accomplished is similar to getting through all of the basic MBA finance courses, but you managed to do it for less money and in a time-efficient way. Thats the beauty of the program.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 3:47PM
@101 -- right on
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 4:02PM
This thread is almost as sweet as when the dooshe's on MSN debate the merits of the Wii vs. PS3 or the Blackberry vs. Iphone or manscaping vs. the back/sack & crack wax
a) CFA, no doubt
2) Wii
3) Blackberry, obviously
4) b/s & c, so smooooth
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 4:04PM
Level 1 is cake if you have a handle on accounting. Level 2 is much, much more in depth. If you guys who are celebrating how easy Level 1 was think you're going to skate by Level 2 without much effort, prepare to bend over.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 4:14PM
101 Could be, but isnt that (making other people think you're better) the key to landing a job or getting a promotion in the first place? Which is in good part why people do the program.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 4:33PM
@102 = jackass for calling out someone 94 posts before you, no one wants to scroll that far up.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 4:43PM
107, 101 here. Yes, but people here are debating the learning that takes place in either a CFA or MBA. My point is it is irrelevant because getting the job is the main thing. People place great importance on the credential and therefore you need to have it to 1. get the job and 2. get the raise.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 4:45PM
does anyone have stats on %that pass who took a class?
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 4:46PM
Hilarious thread. 90 bid that over 80% of the people debating MBA vs. CFA have neither....
For all the people quoting the 35%/15% stats etc, don't kid yourself. In metro areas like Boston/NY/Chicago, I'd say 65% is a low estimate for people who pass all three on there first shot. I know people in IT who went 3/3.
For people bragging about 70+ on every section, get over yourself and start studying for LII...
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 4:47PM
@105 how awful is your life you have been apart of all these threads
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 5:18PM
I passed Level I with <20 hours of studying. It was actually pretty easy.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 5:18PM
@111 Don't be so sure. Lot of idiots in NYC. Alot of bright bulbs in the South.
Failed Ethics in LI. Got job anyway.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 5:32PM
113 Totally possible, with the right educational background and job experience. I is a lot of accounting and finance basics. Brush up a bit on ethics and econ and you're there. A friend did the same. Warning: he then tried that with II and failed miserably.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 5:44PM
@89 - it's because we grew up playing with toys like lawn darts with pointed tips...unlike the younger crowd that believes the world should be made from nerf.
--CS
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 5:56PM
passed as well
but seriously, fuck bonds...
-oz
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 6:07PM
failed, will pass in june.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 6:28PM
It's a slap in the face when they rank your fail. Lol, of 10 to suck, you are the suckiest!
I did fail with performance band 10. >70 in half of the categories. 50-70 in the other half. Nothing in the below 50 category. Will not take again....too much studying. I'll get a MS or MBA instead...
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 7:02PM
@99, fail.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 7:05PM
I was the only Italian paizano I saw taking the exam in NYC and I'm pleased to say I represented and passed with flying colors BAHNG. For my fellow Italians (Gasparino included) this one is for you!
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 8:03PM
CFA 1 = memorize memorize memorize. It teaches f*ck all about finance. I passed it and can't remember a damn thing.
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 8:41PM
As for the MBA / CFA thing: you ppl who think MBA is about learning are just too naive.
The MBA (at least at the top-5) is about becoming insta-friends with about 1,000 rich or soon-to-be-rich people with whom you share a "bond" for the rest of your life (whether it's authentic or not is irrelevant). It is a huge advantage no matter what business you go into afterward. Any business is about people, and top MBA programs figured that out a long time ago.
Both the MBA and CFA can teach you some skills that will be useful for about six months afterward, but in the end people are what matter, and lifetime access to very successful people is what you get for your $200,000 tuition. CFA gives you access to a bunch of finance douches most of whom are useful only when calculating who owes what at dinner.
Posted by Seaman Bodine III , Jan 28, 2009 8:44PM
Almost every FoF is littered with CFAs. Every family office too.
Not too many at DESCO, Bwater, Rentec, SAC, etc.
If you're actually in this business you'd know that the FoF and family office world is a bunch of fucking knuckle draggers.
Every broker dealer research department is also CFA stacked. Like that soothsayer Ah-bu-jeet, for example. That dude, like all the street research tools, is a fucking moron.
The funny thing is, every CFA on the street right now is sweating their ass off.
The only CFAs worth a damn are the sales guys that did it to impress their bosses and get their dopey research departments to back off, when they go off the reservation (eg. "here's our morning call on GS, our analyst is a tool, but check out the model").
Posted by guest , Jan 28, 2009 9:54PM
@124 DESCO and Rentec have mostly Math & Physics PhDs who don't need an MBA or CFA to show they're smart. You obviously don't work at any of these places in a senior role because those people read Wilmott or Nuclear Phynance, not Dealbreaker.
Posted by guest , Jan 29, 2009 12:38AM
@67:
It wasn't an octopus, it was a squid. The grasshopper screwed around all summer, while the squid flailed around on the hot pavement and eventually dried to a crisp. In the winter, the grasshopper survived by eating the dried squid.
The next summer, the grasshopper screwed off the whole time, thinking he'd find another dried squid that would get him through the winter. Unfortunately, much like our banker friends and their bonuses, there was no dried squid in the driveway this time around, and the grasshopper starved to death out in the cold.
Posted by guest , Jan 29, 2009 8:57AM
From my own experience, I can say that having Level I on my resume has attracted interest from several funds. I'm glad I did it.
Posted by guest , Jan 29, 2009 9:08AM
Q: If you failed LI, what the fuck are you doing reading dealbreaker? You must have something better to do...
Posted by guest , Jan 29, 2009 9:25AM
of course the pass rates are declining. The keepers of the vault have noticed the huge surge in people taking the tests, and if all of them get minted as CFAs, it dilutes the value of the CFA, doesn't it?
Posted by Cincinnatus C , Jan 29, 2009 9:37AM
the CFA has helped me do better work, and save time not having to learn concepts related to models i was later expected to build. no question the CFA helped there. even Level I helped me put out a better work product while studying..before i took the exam.
it hasn't done shi* for my career though cuz i followed the wrong path from the get-go. then again, i also screwed myself by refusing some good offers (one PE and one prime brokerage HF) just cuz of salary issues. I was SO short-sighted it makes me want to commit suicide and take the "too short, didn't read" guy out w/me.
Posted by Cincinnatus C , Jan 29, 2009 9:38AM
the CFA has helped me do better work, and save time not having to learn concepts related to models i was later expected to build. no question the CFA helped there. even Level I helped me put out a better work product while studying..before i took the exam.
it hasn't done shi* for my career though cuz i followed the wrong path from the get-go. then again, i also screwed myself by refusing some good offers (one PE and one prime brokerage HF) just cuz of salary issues. I was SO short-sighted it makes me want to commit suicide and take the "too short, didn't read" guy out w/me.
Posted by guest , Jan 29, 2009 11:26AM
Neither the CFA or MBA qualify you for very much. It is far more important to get a job, make the right contacts and work hard.
The CFA does show a lot in terms of work ethic/commitment and an MBA shows that you did fairly well in undergrad and scored ok on the GMAT.
I have a Top Ten MBA and CFA and have several friends with neither who are extremely successful in the financial world for the aforementioned reasons. If you have contacts and have a great job, you probably wouldn't pursue either credential.
For the record, the pass rates in NYC are much higher than the published rates. At least 70% of the people I know that have taken the test, passed all three on the first try. In my exams, I had the same to people sitting on either side of me for all 3 exams(the seating is organized by candidate number). Either the NYC pass rates are off or this was a statistical anomaly.
Posted by guest , Jan 29, 2009 11:27AM
Neither the CFA or MBA qualify you for very much. It is far more important to get a job, make the right contacts and work hard.
The CFA does show a lot in terms of work ethic/commitment and an MBA shows that you did fairly well in undergrad and scored ok on the GMAT.
I have a Top Ten MBA and CFA and have several friends with neither who are extremely successful in the financial world for the aforementioned reasons. If you have contacts and have a great job, you probably wouldn't pursue either credential.
For the record, the pass rates in NYC are much higher than the published rates. At least 70% of the people I know that have taken the test, passed all three on the first try. In my exams, I had the same two people sitting on either side of me for all three exams(the seating is organized by candidate number). Either the NYC pass rates are off or this was a statistical anomaly.
Posted by guest , Jan 29, 2009 2:23PM
I passed all 3 in 2008 with 98% scores and I am lying.
Posted by guest , Jan 29, 2009 2:30PM
134 News flash, you take them sequentially, cant pass all three in one year. You remind me of me: one November long ago I sent for the CFA instruction book. Package arrived, around 1/4 inch thick, like series 7. I tossed it on the pile, thinking how hard is it to go through 50 pages between now and next June. I opened it in March, realized fast that that was just backround on how the program worked. Ordered the books rush delivery and went through hell for the next 2.5 mos. Eventually got through all three levels. Program is highly recommended, but don't do it the way I did.
Posted by guest , Jan 29, 2009 4:02PM
@135....I believe 134 was satire
Posted by guest , Jan 29, 2009 7:05PM
I passed sequentially in 2001, 2002 and 2003.
248 hours for L1 (barely passed)
Friend at the time in Sell side research said don't let L2 fool you, spend 500 hours, I spent 510 and thought I was going to lose my mind.
L3 is all encompassing and really brings it together (340 hours).
I've got a 2nd tier MBA (did that first) and then validate your smarts with the CFA.
If I had to do it again, I'd kill the GMAT and go to a top 10 MBA because as one poster already noted its buying access to well connected people and life long friends you don't necessarily get at a 2nd tier program.
I did do a 2nd round buy side interview and they gave me an hour and a half exam (undisclosed prior to the interview) and had I not been over prepared and reviewed the CFA materials I would not have passed their exam and garnered the offer.
Net result is if you are tenacious and young do both.
Posted by guest , Feb 03, 2009 6:59PM
I dont get it, uncle bernie taught me everything about ethics and he lived like a king so i thought he knew what the hell he was talking about.. But it does not seem to work on the exam. O well, what the heck does the CFA know anyway..