Stuj79

[Stuj79]

Up

6

::

It may sound a bit silly but I remember is this way…I think of a court of law and say the worst error they could make is finding an innocent man guilty. In court it is “innocent until proven guilty”, so the null hypothesis is innocence.Finding an innocent man guilty is the same as “rejecting the null hypothesis. I then relate the number 1 to “worst” therefore resulting in a type 1 error of rejecting the null when true…..I.e. Finding an innocent man guilty.

[Stuj79]

Up

5

::

I’m not sure, I haven’t voted yet either…still have economics, corp finance, derivatives and portfolio management to go through so can’t really comment as yet. I can’t see anyone’s results either….perhaps people could also write their choice as well as click on the vote option.

@wesmantooth….which option did you choose out of interest?

[Stuj79]

Up

5

::

Yeshank said:

I dont know if this can be posted here but i would like to help you out with a cheaper solution to schweser books

http://www.vividbook.org/2015.CFA.Study.Solutions.asp

Just FYI that site is selling copywrited material illegally so if you do buy from there you have immediately broken the CFA code of ethics. That site should be investigated and closed down….I mean I appreciate Schweser is expensive but those people are basically stealing their hard work and profiting from it at $130 a go!!! 

[Stuj79]

Up

5

::

Ah right, yes I see how that notation could be missinterpreted…glad to help 🙂

[Stuj79]

Up

5

::

They give both “online practice tests” and “mock exams”….. Two full mock exams I believe. Make sure you do both mocks and all online practice test sections…

[Stuj79]

Up

5

::

Yes absolutely 100% worth it….CFAI mocks and practice tests, along with the curriculum End of Chapter questions should be your number 1 priority in terms of practice questions. Schweser do a decent job at level 1 but their questions aren’t exactly like the ones the CFAI produce…

[Stuj79]

Up

5

::

No probs @paulpassedtense :smiley: 

I have been using a few main providers for my mocks – Finquiz, Konvexity, Schweser, CFAI and now Adapt Prep/Passed Tense.

I would say my least favourite are Schweser. I can’t quite explain it, but the way they are written just doesn’t feel like the same style as the CFAI stuff; this along with the fact that they are a little too easy/simplistic (in my opion) means I favour them the least.

Finquiz and Konvexity are both significantly tougher than the Schweser stuff. Finquiz style of questions feels very close to the CFAI style, whereas Konvexity definitely has a different style/syntax – but I believe this is due to the question writer not being a native English speaker. I have been averaging between 55-60% on Finquiz, and around 60-65% on Konvexity.

I have now completed 2 full mocks on Adapt prep and scored 70% both times – I feel the style of questions are very similar to Finquiz, although I find them a little bit easier. They are similar to the CFAI stuff and of around the same difficulty. As the site is currently in beta, obviously I have come across the odd error here and there (I have sent in about 15 “report question” tickets), but overall a very positive experience so far.

One comment would perhaps be that the actual text content of the vignettes in Adapt Prep are a little shorter than both the CFAI and Finquiz vignettes – but not massively so.

For a reasonable price I would definitely consider using Adapt Prep test material in future.

[Stuj79]

Up

5

::

@Prosper0 cheers 🙂 I’m relatively happy with where I am at and feel like if the “right” questions come up on the exam I’ll do ok….however if the “wrong” questions come up then I’m fully aware it could knock my scores down into the fail band. 

Its hard to feel overly confident for L2 for so many reasons 

Throughout L1 I never felt like I had any doubt….but that feelings well and truly gone haha

Good luck to everyone for Saturday!! Not long until we get our freedom back at least…

[Stuj79]

Up

5

::

I’ll opt for C 🙂

[Stuj79]

Up

5

::

I’d say no, L1 review is definitely not necessary….the L2 curriculum has “optional recap sections” whenever they are needed and in fact in terms of specifics there really isn’t THAT much explicit overlap between L1 and L2. I mean of course general foundations are built on, but any specific knowledge needed from L1 is explicitly recapped in the L2 materials.

Dive right into the JOY that is the L2 experience my friend 😉

[Stuj79]

Up

5

::

Does it show any working or explanation to go with the answer?

[Stuj79]

Up

5

::

That’s quite an impressive speed you’ve managed to achieve. I consider myself a relatively fast reader and I am 99 hours in having just started the first reading in the Risk Management Applications of Derivatives study session… AND I totally skipped all of volume 1 (ethics).

Mind you, I have been doing all of the EOCs as I’ve gone along. 

I’m guessing another 20-25 hours will see me through most of what I have left but that will still be 125 hours for a single read through!!

I have February 6th as a goal date for finishing my first read through, at which point I will sit a couple of AM/PM mock exams, check where I am especially weak, and go back over those sections. Then it’s reading through condensed 3rd party material to get a quick recap of everything, making Anki flashcards and short notes as I go along.

Then it’s just going to be mocks exams, EOCs, flashcards and drilling stuff over and over again until the exam.

How are you feeling after your first read through?

[Stuj79]

Up

5

::

Remember the put/call parity formula is made up of 4 components…

The put, the call, the underlying AND the risk free bond. So saying just buy or sell underlying if put or call are overpriced or underpriced etc isn’t correct

the formula is:

S + p = c + X/(1 + r)t

So a call should be equal to c = S + p – X/(1+r)t

If the call is overpriced then you sell the call and buy the underlying, buy a put and sell a risk free bond.

I won’t go through every possible combination of call and put over and under priced but you can work them all out from the formula outlined above.

[Stuj79]

Up

5

::

I wouldn’t be too concerned this far out from the exam. It’s a good mark which is the most important thing…the timing is something that you can work on. And in fact, as you get used to the item set format you’ll naturally just speed up anyway and find it easier to pick out the relevant info for the question at hand. It’s a skill in itself.

So yeah, don’t worry to much, but do be aware that over a few weeks of hammering out more mocks you should be eating away at the time it takes….just make sure the “time taken” curve is sloping downward in the long term.

[Stuj79]

Up

5

::

For the L3 pm style mocks I averaged 73% across the two… I agree there were some pretty tough questions, but overall wasn’t too bad.

My guess is that the real pm exam will be easier than that. It always is.

How are you finding the AM? My score has been steadily riding…. First CFAI mock I did was 2006 and I got 56%…. Last one I did was 2014 and hit 83% so feeling OK about that.

Gonna sit the last am mock I have, 2015 over the weekend and just drill flashcards, ethics and abit if gips over the last few days.

I always take the last Friday off completely to recharge, ready for the Saturday slog.

[Stuj79]

Up

5

::

Done 3/3 in 18 months…bosch!!! SO happy to have this thing out of the way and behind me for good!!!

[Stuj79]

Up

4

::

I agree – no violation there for me. He didn’t actually take any records with him (that belong to the firm) and he has no non-compete so nothing wrong there. As long as he contacted the clients using information from “public sources” – then that is ok.

[Stuj79]

Up

4

::

Sorry I meant “net credit sales” rather than “purchases”….you say all sales were made on credit but don’t provide a figure. The cash collected of 30 can’t be credit sales as, well…..its cash.

In my opinion to calculate receivables turnover we need a figure for net credit sales

[Stuj79]

Up

4

::

Sorry that should have read “finding an innocent man guilty is the same as rejecting the null hypothesis when it is true”

[Stuj79]

Up

4

::

Well I took the Dec level 1 exam so I haven’t even found out if I have passed that yet, but I thought I’d hedge my bets and start level 2 studying anyway. I’m about 70 hours in, having gone through Quant, Equities, Alt Inv and I am about 1/3 through FRA. I wish I could have started earlier, but I am hoping to finish my first read through by February 20th….I have a two week business trip to Hong Kong during that time though, so I’ll have to be strict with my timetable. I’m using the CFAI material for my first read through doing all BBs and EOCs, then will use Schweser for my review and then spend the last 45 days or so doing just mock exams and pinpointing areas of weakness.

[Author]

Posts