The problem is, Finance simply does not have enough quality professional designations besides CFA

Anyone agree?

The only two designations worth any actual respect in finance are the CFA and CPA.

maybe a SLIGHT respect for CMA, but not much

but beyond this, there are no real options for those looking to grow and get better,

Corporate finance, VC, ER, and investment banking all have no serious professional designation

The CFA is all we have. The CFA is tailored more towards portfolio management, but it is really the only quality, impressive designation to pursue for those looking to differentiate themselves. It’s a shame. Why are there not more quality designations for other areas of finance?

Fully agree. And this also implies that many people in various fields of the finance industry do not know what the CFA designation means so when they regard you might think “oh he’s studying some analysis stuff. Big deal.”

i was looking at this from a United States point of view, sorry. We don’t have acca in the US

I think ACCA is too common now, like when MBA was new many people rushed to it and now a large percentage of world population must be MBAs (yes I exaggerated), besides it is only known in few parts of the world, not heavily marketed as CA or CPA. In my opinion, the greater the difficulty of designation, the greater the value and many agree that CFA is the toughest test to pass and stands besides CA of many countries in level of difficulty. ACCA, you only have 4 challenging Ps to pass and the rest is walk in the park

Why, exactly, is having only a few quality professional designations a problem?

It wouldn’t a problem if the CFA was a defacto all-encompassing finance expert exam.

The problem lies that most sectors of finance do not appreciate the CFA, and thus those looking to increase their knowledge have no exam to pursue that is appreciated unless they do portfolio management.

If IB, corp finance, VC, etc all valued the CFA then there would be no problem.

I don’t think so. Do we have to?

are you a CFA candidate?

@Ali: please go and study for CFA/ACCA…

+1.

ACCA -1st

CFA-2nd

All the best.

lol

I donot think any one does CFA before ACCA

I’d prefer the CFA to offer 10 papers, then you do 3 core papers plus a choice of 3 others (i.e you sit 6 papers). This would allow the candidates to have deeper understanding of a narrower syllabus.

I think ACCA is not so tricky, perhaps ASA is a better comparison.

https://www.soa.org/education/exam-req/edu-asa-req.aspx

Every country has a accounting designation.

ACCA/CPA are global.

which level?

I think we’re all forgetting about the all-powerful CFAI Claritas certificate.

It’s so rare and powerful, I have yet to meet anyone who has it or is even willing to take it.

^burn

FWIW I’d rather only have a handful of quality and respected certifications. Let the alphabet soupers have fun.

For some of those professions: IB at junior level are drones, senior levels its who you know. VC its a lot of who you know. Certifications won’t be of much use there regardless of what they are ER recognizes the CFA though, not sure who said they don’t.

totally agree. And I would give a weary eye for someone who felt it was necessary to get 5 finance designations. Real performers kick butt on the job, not on the tests

It’s because at the end of the day, finance is soley about making money, we don’t care about saving the planet or creating life-changing products for retail consumers. Certifications only do so much, experience and results are what counts.