This is really just to vent – I’m finding this chapter (Emerging Markets Finance) almost impossible to read. I understand the main ideas (I think) but there’s just so much text, citing so many studies that sometimes contradict each other.
planning on re reading the conclusion page but otherwise sticking with schweser. Any thoughts on how testable this chapter is?
Emerging markets is always a bitch. Even the L2 text was spurious and vague at best. I dont know about the ‘testability’ of it so I’d also be interested in an answer about that.
i have to agree. Who ever wrote this Reading should not write. It’s very difficult to read. And I’m also curious how testable this is. Anybody know if this reading was mentioned incurrent or previous practice exams?
BRICS & Emerging markets, two readings which are completely ************************* !!!
I intend to only give a reading from finquiz concise summary once. Testability - wish I knew too 
I think the GIPS reading was twice as bad in “walls of text” sort of stuff.
Yeah, this was absolutely brutal. There is “dry” and then there is Reading 30. And this coming from someone who likes empirical research, emerging markets, etc.
BRICs was at least interesting, although not very testable. GIPS is testable, which makes it way worse. GIPS is going to be painful to memorize.
For readings like this, I find it better to just listen to the Schweser lecture while doing something else passively (cooking, masturbating, petting your dog).
Well, the reading tends to repeat itself a lot. I have “the ethical principles of fair representation and full disclosure” memorized for the rest of my life after going through that reading just one time.
It would be so much easier if they would just put all these rules in a freakin’ table instead of putting it all in paragraph form and wall-o-text form.
I’ve mentioned before, but the actual GIPS handbook from the Institute’s web site is way easier to read and follow.
Its hard to remember but worth absorbing some key facts . In Lvl 3 questions appear quite vague until and unless you can fetch these random facts from a bottomless pool of memory . For example look at the answer to Part A ii in 2011 morning exam.
I wouldn’t have guesed in a 1000 years to write that Poland is an EM country and we should write that and say EM countries have a non-normal returns distribution .
There are little nuggets of gold all over the curriculum , but it can be harder than mining for bitcoins to remember them
Let’s hope that the payoff is better than mining for bitcoins: on Wednesday they lost half their value in 6 hours:
While we’re venting, I dislike doing swap problems with a LIBOR of 7%! Can’t they at least make it feel like someone has looked at these problems in the last 10 years?