Areas of CFA level 2 not covered well by Schweser

[hassan.mahfooz]

Dear All
I would like to know the areas not covered well by the Schweser notes so that I use the CFAI /Finquiz for the same? One such area I heard of is the Mortgage Backed Securities. I have been advised to study it from the book rather than Schweser. Is that true?
What are the other areas where Schweser is to be avoided?
Thank you

 

[mhodge24]

all of it

 

[cgottuso8190]

To be fair, Schweser made FRA’s easier to work with (CFAI presents a cumbersome one-step formula).
EDIT: By FRA’s I mean forward rate agreements, not financial reporting & analysis.

 

[panos.kollias]

I just finished the MBS and ABS portions and found that Schweser did a really poor job - I was actually very frustrated while trying the EOC’s. If you are strapped for time you can identify where it is lacking and read only those portions from the original material.
If I recollect correctly, there were some poorly covered areas in FRA material too but I can’t be sure of which exactly.

 

[gringo_bob]

agree on the ABS,
i found myself referring to CFAI text a lot for FRA, not sure if that’s because schweser is bad though, I think FRA is just the most spirit crushingly horrible topic to learn.
I found the schweser derivatives content to be really good, my 1 gripe would be that loads of the questions on qbank are about pricing derivatives when the CFAI questions appear to focus more on valuing them. makes sense considering the overarching theme of level 2.

 

[bloodline]

mhodge24 wrote:
all of it

I agree with this. Unless you are familiar with the curriculum by nature of your experience, undergraduate or postgraduate studies etc. I wouldn’t advise using Schweser in any way for the level 2 at all. I found it to be too brief, focussing only on addressing the subjects of the LOS and nothing more.

 

[hassan.mahfooz]

But I have seen people who have passed using Schweser. I do not have enough time to study the CFAI now and can only read selected topics from it. Can you advise the topics which are vital to read from the CFAI and are not covered by Schweser at all.

 

[Stevie Ray]

For areas not covered as well by schweser I have gone over to the Elan videos. If you have the money, fork it over.

 

[johnmike0985]

bloodline wrote:

mhodge24 wrote:
all of it

I agree with this. Unless you are familiar with the curriculum by nature of your experience, undergraduate or postgraduate studies etc. I wouldn’t advise using Schweser in any way for the level 2 at all. I found it to be too brief, focussing only on addressing the subjects of the LOS and nothing more.

With so much info why would you want focus on anything else other than the Los subject matter. I find it covers the material just fine. If I am having trouble with a topic I reference cfai.

 

[bloodline]

johnmike0985 wrote:
With so much info why would you want focus on anything else other than the Los subject matter. I find it covers the material just fine. If I am having trouble with a topic I reference cfai.

In my opinion, focussing strictly on the LOS is a strategy that works perfectly for Level 1 where you have so much width in the amount of information you have to absorb and very little depth. For Level 2, the curriculum is centred on more depth and less width, so you need so much information to make sure you understand not just what the LOS says you should.
In the end, the best approach is actually an individual thing. I have seen people pass from watching Videos alone, some pass by studying Schweser for three weeks, others, like me, require months of studying line by line, the boring details of the curriculum. I hope i pass, if i fail, i know i couldn’t have prepared any better.

 

[dailygrind]

johnmike0985 wrote:

bloodline wrote:

mhodge24 wrote:
all of it

I agree with this. Unless you are familiar with the curriculum by nature of your experience, undergraduate or postgraduate studies etc. I wouldn’t advise using Schweser in any way for the level 2 at all. I found it to be too brief, focussing only on addressing the subjects of the LOS and nothing more.

With so much info why would you want focus on anything else other than the Los subject matter. I find it covers the material just fine. If I am having trouble with a topic I reference cfai.

schweser provides no meat to bone. It’s a summary, making short bullet points that doesn’t quite explain the process to its outcome or reasoning. Though it does do a decent job at derivatives and making graphic maps/tables of processes and outcomes in many topics, everything else is sort of crap I think.

 

[Arsenal]

The Portfolio Concepts reading (54 I think) is missing a tonne of stuff in Schweser. To make things worse, I can’t understand jack from the curriculum either.