AM session- popular shortforms , signs acceptable or not

A

archived_user

New member
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
Hi,
As we all know time is crucial in AM sessions. Are these allowed?
1.To save time can we use common sign for increase/ decrease .
2. If we don’t write formula or write formula but annotation are different (you made them up, in stress)
3. Short phrases like less inflation less withdrawal thus greater risk tolerance
Also any other time saving tip
 
They are very much allowed. U don’t even need completed sentences so long as meaning is clear.
 
Anything on intermarket carry trades can be responded with a “omg idgaf”. That will be acceptable.
 
A buddy of mine who went to the Schweser weekend course said that arrows are a no go. Same with other common acronyms like three dots for therefore. They told him the exam graders are a combination of locals and foreigners and to only use the most common acronyms (PV, FV, DB pension, etc).
Don’t shoot the messenger.
 
When it lists calculate do we have to define all variables in the formula or list the formula
 
My understanding is that we do not. Marc from Level Up and S200 said that it is a waste of time to do that. If it helps you ensure the correct answer, then yeah, do it. Otherwise, I wouldn’t. It would be absurd for a 3 minute calculation to require that, it would take at least a minute to define each variable. For implementation shortfall, I will certainly be writing them out.
 
CFAI says that partial credit may be given for correct formulas.
Marc/S200 said don’t spell the formulas out.
E.g. If you’re writing the Yardeni formula, saying:
E/P = Corporate Bond Yield - D X LTEG
suffices. I wouldn’t bother writing what D or LTEG are…
 
I’m not bothering to write the formula. The graders know the formula and they know the variables. I will be putting in the variables.
ie. 5% = 4.2% - .1 * 8%
 
Tactics wrote:
CFAI says that partial credit may be given for correct formulas.
Marc/S200 said don’t spell the formulas out.
E.g. If you’re writing the Yardeni formula, saying:
E/P = Corporate Bond Yield - D X LTEG
suffices. I wouldn’t bother writing what D or LTEG are…
Click to expand...
A-rated of course
 
Are the graders charterholders, or finance professors?
Or just random people who get an answer sheet with possible acceptable answers?
 
Voyager3 wrote:
A buddy of mine who went to the Schweser weekend course said that arrows are a no go. Same with other common acronyms like three dots for therefore. They told him the exam graders are a combination of locals and foreigners and to only use the most common acronyms (PV, FV, DB pension, etc).
Don’t shoot the messenger.
Click to expand...
Not shooting, but this is incorrect. All of the exams are brought back to CFAI headquarters and graded there. Graded by Charterholders and/or finance PhDs. So symbols are ok and no locals are used.
 
Mattyj7183 wrote:
Voyager3 wrote:
A buddy of mine who went to the Schweser weekend course said that arrows are a no go. Same with other common acronyms like three dots for therefore. They told him the exam graders are a combination of locals and foreigners and to only use the most common acronyms (PV, FV, DB pension, etc).
Don’t shoot the messenger.
Click to expand...
Not shooting, but this is incorrect. All of the exams are brought back to CFAI headquarters and graded there. Graded by Charterholders and/or finance PhDs. So symbols are ok and no locals are used.
Click to expand...
I have spoken to many a grader who have said that they are not there to interpret your answers and try to read your mind. They will give no credit for arrows going up or down if your intent is to say decrease or increase.
The graders are all charterholders.
 
CEO10K-DAY wrote:
Mattyj7183 wrote:
Voyager3 wrote:
A buddy of mine who went to the Schweser weekend course said that arrows are a no go. Same with other common acronyms like three dots for therefore. They told him the exam graders are a combination of locals and foreigners and to only use the most common acronyms (PV, FV, DB pension, etc).
Don’t shoot the messenger.
Click to expand...
Not shooting, but this is incorrect. All of the exams are brought back to CFAI headquarters and graded there. Graded by Charterholders and/or finance PhDs. So symbols are ok and no locals are used.
Click to expand...
I have spoken to many a grader who have said that they are not there to interpret your answers and try to read your mind. They will give no credit for arrows going up or down if your intent is to say decrease or increase.
The graders are all charterholders.
Click to expand...
Interesting to know that, thank you for the headsup, i was planning to use arrow up/downs
also, i wonder how the graders make a living in real life: if you have individual as client, you have to “read” minds; if you have institutions as client, you have to work with abbre, because that make you seem to know what you talking about; if you teach, i dont know big of a whiteboard is big enough for writing out every terminology
this is a service industry afterall, and i paid handsomely to serve the like / dislike of random graders ?
if CFAI goal is to set high standards, they need to look in the mirror and wonder who wrote these ambiguous and silly questions that are so disconnected with the real industry ?
 
arrows up/downs seems really odd that wont be credited- i have seen both Mark M and IFT solutions using it and was intending to use it-rather it was becoming a habit in last few weeks as I did more mocks..ah, now the doubt just at nth hr…
 
You do not, the only point I would make, and this from Schweser, is indentifying the variables (not necessarily the formula). for example, ERP, most questions give you sharpe ratio, an arrow showing sharp, std deviation, correlation, integration weight, it lets the grader see your steps more clearly. If they have to guess it’s wrong. But can award partial credit if they can follow your process. I find myself just calculating the answer based on data in table. Some I’ve gotten wrong we’re just input errors. If you have a wrong answer because you transposed a number, but the process was correct, you’re on good path.
 
As for writing out the formula, here’s what CFA Institute sent me in an e-mail yesterday:
A candidate is not required to explicitly show all variables and values of a formula; a correct answer on its own may be awarded full points. When answers are incorrect, partial credit may be awarded for completing part of the calculation or for correct formulas with some correct inputs. Therefore, if the question says “show your calculations,” it is in the candidate’s best interest to do so, for the potential to earn partial credit. Minor errors may have a significant effect on the points awarded; it varies by question and the type of partial credit available.
You do not need to write out the formula, and you certainly do not need to explain each variable in the formula. Anyone who says differently is wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top