标题: Don't laugh....how about pursuing CIPM? [打印本页] 作者: sabre 时间: 2011-7-13 16:13 标题: Don't laugh....how about pursuing CIPM?
I was thinking of using this "downtime" pursuing CIPM. Do you think it's a marketable differentiator for a small wealth management firm?作者: canadiananalyst 时间: 2011-7-13 16:13
its a performance/attribution designation作者: mar350 时间: 2011-7-13 16:13
SuperiorReturn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> its a performance/attribution designation
yes, it is performance measurement designation; which can be invaluable in manager selection process.作者: IAmNeil 时间: 2011-7-13 16:13
Ashwin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SuperiorReturn Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > its a performance/attribution designation
>
> yes, it is performance measurement designation;
> which can be invaluable in manager selection
> process.
If its invaluable, why dont you do it?
Collect them all!作者: ohai 时间: 2011-7-13 16:13
:*
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at Thursday, July 8, 2010 at 09:22AM by tkchunc.作者: liangfeng 时间: 2011-7-13 16:13
If you are serious about equity analysis, I wouldn't even bother作者: pennyless 时间: 2011-7-13 16:13
I had the same idea Ashwin. u can complete it in one year, and when i saw the LOS of the 2 CIPM levels, it looked as an logical extension for the last 3 S.S of Level 3. Iam considering taking it after finishing Level 3. Hope to Pass )作者: thommo77 时间: 2011-7-13 16:13
The 1st level of the CIPM is nothing but a rehash of the performance material from L3 (only easier)....
The second half seems to go a little further into performance attribution and evaluation.
I am currently a performance analyst, and there's no way in hell I would take the CIPM out of fear of getting labeled as a "performance guy" forever...
Also, McLeod81, CFA, CIPM just doesn't look right. I think it would take too much focus away from the more important letters.作者: lcw77 时间: 2011-7-13 16:13
CIPM is pretty much useless in the manager analysis field. For top Fund of Fund shops a CFA and top MBA is pretty much a staple.
Performance measurement isn't a horrible field and you can make decent coin if the CFA ever decide to make mandatory verification by 3rd party firms. But all the top performance guys have both CFA and CIPM so having the CIPM alone will make you look bad imo.作者: Colum 时间: 2011-7-13 16:14
Why is CFP in the conversation? If you want to be Asset Management CFA is the best. If you want to do FoFs/ Pension Funds CFA is still the best, but the CAIA is gaining traction, and pretty much becoming a staple. End of discussion.作者: Zestt 时间: 2011-7-13 16:14
Ashwin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> great inputs guys! thank you so much. I guess I'll
> put the idea of pursuing CIPM to rest.
>
> McLeod81, what other letters in Finance do you
> consider more important along with CFA/CFP?
If you plan on staying in wealth management, CFP would definitely be more valuable. Your clients will know what the CFP is (or at least be able to figure it out if you tell them what it stands for).
It's not that the knowledge from CIPM isn't valuable, I just don't want to clutter my name with a whole collection of letters. I think it makes a person without much experience look like they don't know what they want.
The reason I wouldn't take the CIPM is that I already know everything I need to know about performance and I want to move on as soon as possible. I would rather spend the time doing reading on my own and learning more about the areas that I want to move into.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 11:20PM by McLeod81.
)