标题: for those who ONLY studied CFA text [打印本页] 作者: bcp901 时间: 2011-7-13 15:19 标题: for those who ONLY studied CFA text
did you do Schweser mocks?? how did you go? CFA EOC q's... piece of cake. schweser Mocks??? i feel like i have done nothing for the past few months.作者: Uranus08 时间: 2011-7-13 15:19
...does the lack of traffic on this post indicate those who use CFAI text only are in the minority?
I think so, you need a "bit" of everything to be really sure you will beat this beast come June 5/6.
I used CFAI text + Schweser videos and Practice exams + Stalla videos and Passmaster.作者: lucasg85 时间: 2011-7-13 15:19
schweser has a massive amount of errata in their text this year that i just noticed yesterday. really unnaceptable i think.作者: hassan 时间: 2011-7-13 15:19
I used CFAI books, did all EOCqs twice, I did all Schweser practice exams, did their online mock AM part, did both CFA sample exams, will do CFA mock early next week
I used CFAI books last year for L1 too, I am used to those, I highlight whats important and it helps me when reviewing, I dont make any own notes.
Practice exams are ok, sometimes questions or answers are wrong or stupid but it does not happen too often. You can see my results in "Schweser Mock discussion" thread.
For example: I remember one question in ethics; you find an arbitrage opportunity (it was something like FX forward arbitrage) and answer says that it is OK to tell client that it is risk-free opportunity to earn money. This is not true, because it can be risk-free from market risk point of view, but not from other (credit) risks point of view...作者: Kapie 时间: 2011-7-13 15:19
I agree show NY, I was looking over the errata last week. Some of the changes are pretty drastic. I dont understand how they can release a text with so many errors in it.... I am glad that I only used Schweser to supplement the CFAI texts....
Starting to stress......作者: senlinlang 时间: 2011-7-13 15:19
I only used the CFAI materials. I work too much to use two sources. I figure if it is a choice, I'll go with the people who actually write the exams. I also used CFAI only for L1 this past December and did well. Hopefully it works out this time too.作者: economicz 时间: 2011-7-13 15:19
I use CFA texts + Schweser practice tests.
Took a few practice tests at the beg of the month, scored ~70%
Now am going back through the material and doing EOC's again. the EOC's seem a lot easier this time around, scoring around 85 - 95% on EOC's
Going to take another Schwesser test this weekend, and the CFAI free practice test and see how I do. Hopefully I score closer to my second round of EOC's. Then just firm up loose ends in the final week.作者: Analyze_This 时间: 2011-7-13 15:19
i'm with you FinNinja. redoing EOC gets eaier and easier. hopefully it'll be natural instinct on exam day.作者: yospaghetti 时间: 2011-7-13 15:19
Oal29 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ...does the lack of traffic on this post indicate
> those who use CFAI text only are in the minority?
>
>
> I think so, you need a "bit" of everything to be
> really sure you will beat this beast come June
> 5/6.
>
>
> I used CFAI text + Schweser videos and Practice
> exams + Stalla videos and Passmaster.
I'm just guessing based off of what I've seen from AF, friends, co-workers, etc... but, I would say that ~75% of candidates use non-CFAI materials (Schweser, Stalla, Elan, etc...) as their primary learning source. I would say that more people switch to CFAI books for L2 and L3 after using a supplementary provider for L1.作者: Pegasus2008 时间: 2011-7-13 15:19
CFAI is actually pretty good. I was talking to someone from AF who had a problem with a question in Schweser. He wrote a paragraph outlining one of his problems with the question. Schweser wrote back to him with a vague one line reply. As for CFAI, I had 2 problems and i e-mailed the Institute. An angel named Wanda replied back to me a few times and each time she wrote a paragraph confirming the error or explaining why i got it wrong. You can't beat that i tell ya....作者: tianxin 时间: 2011-7-13 15:19
Funny, Stalla tells you "don't worry about it there is no LOS that specifically addresses that question".
Then why did you include it?作者: wizofoz 时间: 2011-7-13 15:19
I used only CFAI in December for level 1 and passed. I was really stressed about not having the Schwesser or Stalla info, but it ended up working out. I focused on the EOC questions, purchased two extra sample CFAI exams and did the mock.
I'm in a better situation now financially and purchased the QBank about a month ago. It is certainly useful, but not necessary. More than anything it is a change of pace. It also provides extra questions in case you have tons of study time and feel like you are starting to memorize the EOC answers (rather than material). I don't think there is much difference in the difficulty level, even when you set the QBank to "advanced" questions only.作者: mp3bu 时间: 2011-7-13 15:19
JaRvEy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CFAI is actually pretty good. I was talking to
> someone from AF who had a problem with a question
> in Schweser. He wrote a paragraph outlining one
> of his problems with the question. Schweser wrote
> back to him with a vague one line reply. As for
> CFAI, I had 2 problems and i e-mailed the
> Institute. An angel named Wanda replied back to
> me a few times and each time she wrote a paragraph
> confirming the error or explaining why i got it
> wrong. You can't beat that i tell ya....
I thought CFAI made it clear that to be fair for all candidates, they do not individually explain concepts to candidates. Is that a violation?作者: brainsX 时间: 2011-7-13 15:19
freakingout Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> JaRvEy Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > CFAI is actually pretty good. I was talking to
> > someone from AF who had a problem with a
> question
> > in Schweser. He wrote a paragraph outlining
> one
> > of his problems with the question. Schweser
> wrote
> > back to him with a vague one line reply. As
> for
> > CFAI, I had 2 problems and i e-mailed the
> > Institute. An angel named Wanda replied back
> to
> > me a few times and each time she wrote a
> paragraph
> > confirming the error or explaining why i got it
> > wrong. You can't beat that i tell ya....
>
>
> I thought CFAI made it clear that to be fair for
> all candidates, they do not individually explain
> concepts to candidates. Is that a violation?
I'm more surprised that someone would even reply back at all, much less answer his questions. She was probably wrong. This is what AF is for afterall!
