CFA’s First Exam Is Getting Shorter, More Frequent and Electronic

[breadmaker]

@Nerdyblop

i hear actuarial exams are much more intense than the cfa. but if they are so smart why are they actuarians.

Ay, mijo!! You make me sad!!!

[Black_Swan]

How you perceive the difficulty of the actuarial exams is highly dependent on your math background I think.

[CEO10K-DAY]

FWIW- if you fail the level 1 exam, you’ll be required to wait 6 months before retaking. And if you pass, you have to wait 6 months before registering.

So. It literally changes nothing.

[not_a_CFA]

@Black_Swan

How you perceive the difficulty of the actuarial exams is highly dependent on your math background I think.

one problem with comparing the cfa program with the actuarial path is that, while there are some overlap - particularly on the fundamentals of financial math - the exam focus is significantly different.

The CFA exams encompasses several subjects in finance, with a stronger emphasis on portfolio management. By contrast, actuarial exams are each single subject, with an overall emphasis on probability theory and risk modeling with maybe a sprinkle (if even that) of portfolio theory. As for having a strong math background…the first exam only requires a first year knowledge in calculus (you pretty much only need to be comfortable with finding moments. from what i recall, past exams supposedly had more calculus-type problems, but they changed), but actuaries are expected to be comfortable with stochastic calculus. i suspect there is more of an overlap with FRM, since both actuaries and FRM deal with risks, though there are likely some differences as well.

[Destroyer_of_Worlds]

@not_a_CFA

@Destroyer_of_Worlds

I predict the development of an AI/machine learning credential that will soon > CFA. Spoiler alert – it won’t be the newfangled FDP.

dont financial risk managers already use machine learning algorithms for advanced predictive analytics and to be able to better manage risk, though? i expect that things such as regression, k means clustering and random forests (among several other ML algorithms) is routine for them, so a machine learning certificate would not add much value (since they already know the theory).

By that rationale, nobody would get the CFA if they are “already doing those things” in their jobs. Credentials (and sometimes degrees) are rarely about learning new things, they are credibility vehicles. Also, all of the techniques you mention are AI/ML 101 stuff. I don’t think that anyone has yet mastered all of the logic avenues that might extend beyond the Vernor Vinge-style “singularity.” By definition. I mean, humanity has a long way to go before they have everything figured out.

Every shop in the world is investing heavily in AI/ML initiatives, or just plain old automating even if they aren’t trying to find patterns or make decisions. Fundamental analysts are an endangered species. Classically-trained quants, for all of their fancy language, are attempting to solve higher-order problems with math tools first developed in the 17th century. There is no good framework for dealing with the high degree of recursiveness and feedback that today’s systems and processes generate, which is absolutely essential to model if you want to make predictions or estimates with any precision in today’s markets.

[akshitf5]

Value of CFA will soon come down.

[jcrick]

@brain_wash_your_face

The AI runs everything and gives you a certificate if it likes you.

If you’re similar to those who already have one you’ll get one…