ladies and gentlemen. As you know, there are 4 topics on the level 2 matieral that constitute 5-10% of the exam, aka they could be either 1 or two item sets.
on the 2016 exam, without naming names, one of the “5-10’s” ended up actually being TWO item sets instead of one.
Let’s say you plan on taking the L2 exam again next year, do you think it would be safe to punt this topic? my reasoning is, that if it eneded up being 2 item sets in 2016…the odds of it being 2 again in 2017 i feel are low.
I honestly never thought it was a good idea punting on any of the subjects. Not spending as much time on one versus another is one thing but completely punting seemed like a bad idea. For some of the topics - like alts for instance - it seemed like there was less minutiae in the material than some of the others. Therefore my guess was that more of the high level topics would be tested on the exam for these smaller areas and that factored into my prep.
To straight up answer the question - I wouldn’t go by that logic. I have never yet repeated a level but I bet CFAI views each year as independent.
its not even a GIVEN that I failed (high 50s low 60s mocks, and i thought real thing was easier). but im just covering my bases. I have thought over and over about what I did wrong and I think spending too much time in the weeds on stats and alt inv were some of it
Topic %'s in the 2016 L2 CFAI PDF mock were beyond anything I remotely predicted. I don’t think CFAI would find it hard to make the 2017 actual exam have a % breakdown that is very unexpected. I think truly punting a topic makes absolutely zero sense before the final 8 days or so. Smart, hardworking people fail L2. If the exam is in 14 days and you never read Alt, call in sick and read Alt. There’s 49 weeks, currently.
Additionally, I feel like areas in Quant/Alts/Econ are SOOO easy if you just put in the time to study it, then its pretty much a lay-up on test day. 49 weeks till next June.
Agree w/regards to Quant and Alt, but strongly disagree with Econ.
Reason being: I feel the qualitative material in Econ (mundel fleming, taylor, neoclassical and other theories, fisher/PPParity and all that jazz can get pretty granular and its not particularly (to me at least) intuitive. Assuming I fail on band 9/10 which I think is likely, I plan on reading that section from the CFAI text next year because Schweser abbreviates it pretty hardcore.
As far as Alt Inv: Its basically comprised of three things: the real estate stuff which is largely DCF/Calculator plug and chug, and the VC/PE stuff which is memorization and more plug and chug, and the short 15 page color on commods. None of it is challenging, and if theres a small topic to aim to get 6/6 it would be this one.
Quant is a mixed bag I think: Very much like the rest of the L2 material, knowing the textbook definitions is one thing, its another thing entirely to be able to APPLY them on the exam. I knew hetero/multicoll/serial corr like the back of my hand from a definitions standpoint, but froze up on the exam when they came into play. Not sure how I improve there, I guess pounding he QBank to get recogniion skills up.
Port mgmt i HATED. so many formulas to remember for 6/120 questions. And then on top of that you have that tricky qualitative reading at the waaaaay end on marginal rate of substitution/discretionary spending and consumer preference. Brutual. Anyone have any tips for how to tackle the portfolio mgmt section next year?
Econ is a big section but you can really boil it down to a few concepts, just like the largest section (accounting). You know they’re hitting the parity conditions, fisher, mundell fleming, carry trades, circular arbitrage situations and whatever other items they want to try and get you with.
I was very close to punting on a few of these topic areas, as well. Incredibly happy that I didn’t. Definitely feel as though I was able to bolster whatever my score might be with extra points as a result of simply drilling these areas towards the end of my review process. As frustrating or not intuitive as some of these might be, it is most certainly worth your time to have a working knowledge of the broad concepts.
Good analogy but though punting may not earn points it provides strategic advantages towards scoring more points, which is the main goal. In other words in the context of exam preparation punting might as well be a plausible strategy.
How are you planning ahead this far and already planning on not doing everything?
This kind of strategy is totally meaningless a year before, at this point, if you think you failed you would be better off just starting to read the entire curriculum front to back, especially because it seems like you only used a review guide this year.
also I wouldn’t punt on qualitative portfolio management, which ends up being like half of level III, so you might as well learn what you can now.
actually your post has some merit. Dont ask me ask Andrew Holmes from Kaplan. He’s a big believer in focusing on the core subjects while “strategically” studying for the others. Or in other words punting. Doesn’t mean not opening the book but it also means don’t spin your wheels on a topic that most likely will be 5%. The best strategy is to learn everything but that may not be realistic given time constraints.
^ Which are obviously not a factor in July 2016 for a June 2017 exam. If you’re down to a week or two left, then yeah, sure. This guy has an entire year and already has gone through the material.
