I originally posted this in the L1 forum but was advised to post here for more responses… ________ All, I’ve decided to start studying for the December L1 after recently completing the CPA. I was hoping to hear from other people who have studied for the CPA exam and could offer insight as to how different your study processes have been for the L1 vs studying for the CPA exams. Specifically, have you found that you’ve been able to use similar study techniques for CFA as you did for CPA or have you found that you needed to drastically change how you studied? Also, with CPA the best studying technique is to keep doing questions over and over since the actual exam questions are very similar to the homework questions…is that similar with CFA? FWIW, I did Becker review for CPA and followed their study plan pretty much to the letter: attend class for 8hrs on saturdays, study ~16hrs every week for the 2 chapters covered in class (16hrs was mainly doing questions and flashcards), and have about ~1.5 weeks of final review before taking each of the exams
CFA : CPA :: King Kong : Curious George
I don’t know much about the CPA exams but if it was me, I’d start by studying the pass rates and think about whether I would have the dedication to pursue both charters (and why I would want to do it). If I’m not mistaken (I’m from another country) CPA is about accounting and you’ll probably find that the two career tracks are different. What are your intentions for the future? Therein lies the answer. I think you should think less about classes and study time and more on where you want to be five or ten years from now. I guess that’s about the same thing that was just hinted by user king_kong.
king_kong = back office monkey with neither designation
I do have the dedication to pursue both and I am doing so because I’m unsure as to what my future holds for me career-wise: accounting, finance, or a mix of both. My background is that I graduated last June with a degree in Finance, but qualified for the Accounting one as well due to required accounting credits for the CPA. I currently work for a Big 4 accounting firm, but in the M&A consulting department, so our work overlaps both finance and accounting. Many of my coworkers have their CFAs or are in the process. As for future intentions, I know an MBA is in the cards but not sure of much else. CFA + MBA seems to be a good combo to get a good job somewhere down the line. If I stay in this line of work, having both certifications will be extremely valuable. If I don’t, one or the other will allow for a lot of doors to open.
The way the CPA is administered allows you to study for the sections at different time vs. the CFA that is a one test day. For the CPA I studied a section for a month and then took the test. I did that for all sections. I failed a couple with 74s so that was a pain to have to retake those sections, but I think it is easier to study as you can decide in which day to take which section. The CFA is a different animal. You probably want to get the experience to get the CPA license before studying for the CFA. It would be tough to study for the CFA in public accounting. Anyway, whatever techniques you used for the CPA should applied to the CFA. Do a lot of questions, study the curriculumn and/or use Schweser or Stalla, take a class if that fits you. You will be fine if you are motivated. Also, remember that once you get your CPA license you need to get CPE credits. Another pain. If you take any CFA classes, check if they will give you CPEs. That would be a bonus. Good luck
Alex, Can you shoot me an email quantjockmba at g m a i l
JackA$$ Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > king_kong = back office monkey with neither > designation Your Post : Truth :: Black : White
I guess I’ll chip in as I passed CPA and CFA L1. I think CPA was harder in a sense that you had to know way more details. Since one part of CFA is about the size of entire CPA exam, there is no way they can test to the same level of detail. Having said that, reading CFA materials once most likely won’t be enough. But if you use the same strategy as reading doing questions and then going back to reading some more and than more questions, you’ll find the exam pretty easy. Looking back, I over studied by a mile for L1. Your background is basically what I have (Finance/Accounting double major, passed CPA 1.5 years ago, and L1 this past December). I’m also working for big 4 (which one are you?) I think we have one of the best background for CFA, as FSA is a joke on CFA after FARE on CPA, L2 gets a little bit to the level of detail CPA does, but only on 2 topics. Also as finance major you should find nothing really new on L1, except for MBS, CDO, CMO stuff and maybe corporate governance. Good luck to you and do both if you can. CPA, CFA, MBA the more the better. Top 20 MBA is next step for me after CFA, I think it will be way more valuable than CFA. One thing to keep in mind tho, just because you passed CPA it does not mean you have the license, you need 2 years of Audit experience to get it, but you mentioned you are in M&A, so maybe should take a few rotations in audit to get your audit hours. Hope this helps
^^CFA=NOLIFE, depending on your career goals, I would have to disagree about your MBA comment being more valuable than the CFA! And I would bet that a majority of the folks on this forum would agree. I also think there has been numerous discussions on this: CFA vs. MBA.
I’m talking about top 10-20 MBA not any MBA.
Dude, you are in the M&A department of a big4, thats pretty damn good. The next step is up into a BB if you want. You are in a good position, and CFA can only help. If you have time and can be bothered doing it go for it. But if you don’t its not such a big deal, as most Ibankers in M&A don’t bother with CFA anyway, as I don’t think they have the time to study brosnan6 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I do have the dedication to pursue both and I am > doing so because I’m unsure as to what my future > holds for me career-wise: accounting, finance, or > a mix of both. > > My background is that I graduated last June with a > degree in Finance, but qualified for the > Accounting one as well due to required accounting > credits for the CPA. I currently work for a Big 4 > accounting firm, but in the M&A consulting > department, so our work overlaps both finance and > accounting. Many of my coworkers have their CFAs > or are in the process. > > As for future intentions, I know an MBA is in the > cards but not sure of much else. CFA + MBA seems > to be a good combo to get a good job somewhere > down the line. If I stay in this line of work, > having both certifications will be extremely > valuable. If I don’t, one or the other will allow > for a lot of doors to open.
maddane, Keep in mind M&A at big4 is not M&A at a bank. Experience might be similar but the scale is smaller. Also pay at big4 is a joke. However, many do go into small PE and boutique shops afterward and CFA would def help, but you right you can do pretty ok even without one if you have good experience and network.
I have a similar background - masters accounting, CPA, 1 yr in Big 4 (Dispute Analysis), and passed level 1, been in equity research for 2 years. I speak for only my experience with L1. I agree that the CPA is a littler easier in that you can space out each section, so the volume of info on the CFA L1 is sort of overwhelming. However, difficulty-wise I think they’re similar. My recommendation would be to do just what you said. Go through material and do lots of questions. The best way that someone explained the CFA vs. CPA is that the CFA is a mile wide and an inch deep. However, the CFA requires you to be much more analytical and interpretive than the CPA.
My view is that the CPA seemed to have a wider breadth but the CFA had more depth. Granted, I took the CPA in Nov. 2003, which was the last written version and you had to take all four parts at once. I always felt like the CFA questions were much “trickier” and less straightforward, not that the material was inherently more difficult. Brosnan, your accounting background will be a huge help on L1 and L2.
Honestly, if you’re going after the MBA, I would skip the CFA, unless you really really really wanted to get into portfolio management. But coming from an M&A consulting background you could easily transition into a BB, or private equity firm without bothering with the agony of a CFA. Get your CPA/MBA combo and if you really feel the need for some intellectual stimulation go for the CFA but that’s really all it will do for you at this point.
Bottom line IMHO: CPA > CFA > Top10 MBA. The trifecta is hard to find and unbeatable when it comes to the job market. The comments of brosnan6 and CFA=NOLIFE are most pertinent. Even working on the regulation side, I would say that all three are very useful. It would set anyone in any environment apartIf I had all three at the moment, it would set me well ahead to promotion and advancement given where the market needs are. My goals are similar to brosnan6 and CFA=NOLIFE. Getting all three would be key to getting ahead in portfolio management, especially now. But having this three-some would be useful for getting into a hedge fund or the legacy “Bulge Bracket” firms against the stiff competition that’s likely now. I’ve passed the CPA and am sitting for Dec09 L1. The material isn’t easier or harder, but just different. There are some key areas of contrast. - First, timing provides both advantages and disadvantages. For CPA, you have 18 mos from the time you pass the first part to pass the rest, so starting with the absolute hardest (FIN) and working your way down (REG >> AUD >> BEC) is your best bet. You can also compartmentalise better (one at a time), but there’s a window you have to meet that CFA does not impose. - Second, the material is much more rule-based and detailed for CPA. In certain sections like AUD, one word may change the whole question. In general, I’ve noticed CFA questions are more principles-based and not nearly as nitpicky. - Third, the way you need to look at the test is different. With CPA, much of it is rote memorisation, esp on REG and AUD where the rules are the difference between pass and fail. CFA is much, much more concept-oriented; you have to know the nuances and implications of the formulae, not just how to use them at a basic level. IMHO that makes CFA much more interesting and value-added, whereas with CPA people who love details and memorisation will find that more to their tastes. - Fourth, the material that’s offered for CPA study is much more organised and programmatic, while CFA studying is much more self-based. The material for CPA reminded me of Pikes Peak: it’s well known and limited with far more provided from AICPA in terms of practise questions, practise tests, and other materials that go back decades (I used local libraries to find over 10 yrs’ worth of test materials). On the other hand, CFA is like climbing K2: you really have to work a lot harder even in the planning and organisation of your climb. Without my *own* study planning and previewing I think I would be a goner. For reference, I used Becker for CPA and Schweser for CFA. Becker had an exceptional study format: the program itself (PassMaster) now has a study planner, clickable links to lectures and homework questions, as well as practise tests and simulations. You really have to put no more effort than to follow the instructions and you can pass, easily (yes, time-consuming and energy-intensive, but no thought required to set things up). On the other hand, with Schweser the planning and execution was much more up to me. Their study planner and other tools weren’t as advanced. However, I picked Schweser over Becker/Stalla as Schweser gives you more for your money when it comes to practise and drill opportunities. For less money, I was able to get all the books, audio CDs, flashcards, the QBank (4300 Qs), 2 volumes of practise exams, and the stuff on the website as opposed to a few lectures, books, and questions. The video lectures for both programs seemed like a waste (a friend tried Stalla and let me preview it). - Fifth, I think the material itself posed different challenges from one test to the other. The CPA felt like four sprints: a month or two was the most I needed for each part (well, when I actually studied and passed instead of getting stuck with work and not passing, as I did with FIN). The CFA is totally a marathon: you have to keep a steady pace, making sure you review and re-review the material several times before you start seeing noticeable knowledge acquisition (well, if you’re like me and not a supergenius). That made the CPA more gratifying progress-wise: such a relief after you finish a part and move on, only 1-1.5 mos until you know). But I’ve had to put considerably more time into getting through CFA stuff. Hopefully that was helpful, for what it was worth. Hopefully I can also join you guys in getting the “Triple Crown” of financial mastery too! 
CFA is 10 times harder than the CPA. I studied the CPA 15 minutes a night during Audit busy season (I did have to retake Reg & FIN…15 min a night didn’t cut it there…but what can you do?..thats the Audit trap). I had to give up my life for the CFA.
ABh555 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Bottom line IMHO: CPA > CFA > Top10 MBA. The > trifecta is hard to find and unbeatable when it > comes to the job market. > if someone came to me with a CPA, CFA AND an MBA -my first thoughts would be why has this person got so many quals. the 3 of those is serious overkill and i would be thinking that all those quals is covering up for what they lack experience wise. Just my two cents worth and im sure some people will have a difference of opinion on the mater? Level 1 for me, involved about 3 times the work of a CA subject (equivalant to CPA in oz). The difficult level per question though waqs probly a little tougher on the CA though.
IMHO - once you have some meaningful and progressive work experience (~5 yrs+), the designations become somewhat irrelevant. “What have you done for me lately” becomes MUCH more relevant. “Letter collectors”, as they are often referred to, could be perceived as trying to make up for otherwise inferior qualifications. IMO - two complementary qualifications looks good. 3+ and you begin to look very confused.