BEST results statistics available!!

N

neoboos

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2026
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
here is a website that groups the most comprehensive results statistics available.

this is great stuff! for example, we find out that using the 40/60/80 rule the highest failing grade is 75% the lowest passing grade is 57% based on statistics from December 2007...

post your points of view and comment.

thanks for Juventur, for helping me find that website.

cheers,


PS. that would help us wait for the actual results.
 
ethics is a deciding factor...57% passer probably scored near perfect in ethics whilst the 75% failer probably scored very poorly in ethics.
 
here are the detailed score of the guy failing with an average of 74% (based on the 40/60/80)

- Alternative Assets 12 - - * 12,00 9,60 80,00%
- Derivatives 12 * - - 12,00 4,80 40,00%
- Economics 24 * - - 24,00 9,60 40,00%
- Equity Analysis 24 - - * 24,00 19,20 80,00%
- Ethical & Professional Stnds. 36 - - * 36,00 28,80 80,00%
- Financial Statement Analysis 68 - - * 68,00 54,40 80,00%
- Fixed Income Analysis 24 - - * 24,00 19,20 80,00%
- General Portfolio Management 12 - - * 12,00 9,60 80,00%
- Quantitative Analysis 28 - - * 28,00 22,40 80,00%
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Total Score=> 240,00 177,60 74,00%

his score sheets looks great really, but i guess he was border limit in all his 70%+ scores and real low on Derivatives and Econn.
 
ouch that must be painfull!!!!!

failing with these scores ...
He must have kicked his own ass for econ and derivatives !!!
 
HighestLearning Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ethics is a deciding factor...57% passer probably
> scored near perfect in ethics whilst the 75%
> failer probably scored very poorly in ethics.


where did you get this information?
 
oh! so you really have no idea what he scored. he would have scored a 74% if he had gotten in the middle of every range when he probably scored toward the low end on many sections, since he failed. id really like to see someone post a link to cfai stating that a test with a higher score than a passing test can fail. or something saying ethics is a deciding factor. thanks
 
it's possible that this is a mistake.

if you look at the website closely, a user input the "PASS/FAIL" parameter.

just a thought.
 
Did someone forget that the 40/60/80 rule is an approximation ! He did not score 74%. He would have scored 74% if his scores matched the "40/60/80" rule scores. That obviously need not be the case. For e.g.

Lets assume he scores 71%, 51% and 25% (pessimistically) (instead of the 80/60/40 rule we are applying 71/51/25 rule)

- Alternative Assets 12 - - * 8.5 marks
- Derivatives 12 * - - 12,00 3 marks
- Economics 24 * - - 24,00 6 marks
- Equity Analysis 24 - - * 24,00 17 marks
- Ethical & Professional Stnds. 36 - - * 25.5 marks
- Financial Statement Analysis 68 - - * 48 marks
- Fixed Income Analysis 24 - - * 17 marks
- General Portfolio Management 12 - - * 8.5 marks
- Quantitative Analysis 28 - - * 20 marks

He would have then scored then 154 marks which is 64% which can be a fail. Probably he would have scored much lesser or got 0 marks in econ + derivatives (which would make his %age 60 i.e. applying 71/51/0 rule which anyway is the minimum %age he can ever get for those ranges).

Yes, definitely its a rare occurrence to have scored in the above ranges and still fail, but then, its mathematically possible. And would have been rarest of the rarest cases.

Failing and passing has nothing to do with ethics marks. And the same thing applies to the person who got 57%. His scoring pattern would have been so different that he would have probably got a 65% or something (again his scores would not fit into the 40/60/80 rule)
 
Yes i guess i have to remind everyone, these are not actual scores as we never know actual scores... but with the same data (L1 december 2007) corrected from 40/60/80 to 30/50/70 I find the lowest passing score at 47% and the highest failing at 64%. same delema here...

anyhow, if you downloaded the compiled sheet of all actual passing rates from 1963 to 2007 it is funny to see that in 1999 64% of the candidate passed level 1, whereas in Dec 2005 only 34% passed... so i guess this is not as constant as we though. But is is clear that it has been going down since the beginning.
 
How many people not working in the industry took the exam in 1999...?

And now??
 
Amazingly different group. Different test. Different study materials available. Just not comparable at all.
 
rpradeephere:

no disrespect but i dont think your logic make any sense.

according to the grading guidelines, it seems there are only three scores:70/50-70/50 or his version of 80/60/40 or some other combinations of x/y/z. hence theres no way one can score above a 70 or 80 in his version. theres no other possible scores. even if you score 0%, youll still get the lowest %. and if you score 100% in one section, youll only get the highest percentage.

i dont think its mathematically possible that a score of 74% in 80/60/40 can fail. the highest possible score is 80% on his test.
 
MrK150 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> rpradeephere:
>
> no disrespect but i dont think your logic make any
> sense.
>
> according to the grading guidelines, it seems
> there are only three scores:70/50-70/50 or his
> version of 80/60/40 or some other combinations of
> x/y/z. hence theres no way one can score above a
> 70 or 80 in his version. theres no other possible
> scores. even if you score 0%, youll still get the
> lowest %. and if you score 100% in one section,
> youll only get the highest percentage.
>
> i dont think its mathematically possible that a
> score of 74% in 80/60/40 can fail. the highest
> possible score is 80% on his test.


Oops! This assumption is wrong!

> according to the grading guidelines, it seems
> there are only three scores:70/50-70/50 or his
> version of 80/60/40 or some other combinations of
> x/y/z.

The 70/50-70/50 is not a grading system by any chance and CFAI just uses it to indicate the range in which we got our scores.

What this cfasuccess guy assumes is 70+ score on an average can be 80% in that section, 50-70 score can be 60% on average and less than 50 can be 40%.

However,

The least one can score in a subject with 70+ result is 71% and max is 100%
The least one can score in a subject with 50-70 result is 50% and max is 70%
The least a person in less than 50 result is 0% and max is 49%

Hence, yes, based on 80/60/40 he got a score of 74%, but based on my assumption of 71/51/25 he got some 64% and he can also possibly get lesser than that if he scores the minimum required.

Now CFAI does not pass or fail a person based on the grade range. That is just for our information. CFAI need not even have a look at it. All it has to do is decide, based on some standard that, say, 64% is pass mark. Then 0.64*240 will be no. of questions one has to get right. It does not matter even if he gets 0 in one section and aces another section.

After that job is done, the computer gives the scores in some format by indicating the range in which our score falls in each subject.

The PASS/FAIL is decided based on his total score and then,
 
>even if you score 0%, youll still get the
> lowest %. and if you score 100% in one section,
> youll only get the highest percentage.

This is not correct. You will be allotted marks based on how much you actually score. If one gets 100%, he is given 100%, not capped at 70% or whatever percent. As mentioned, >50/50-70/70+ is just used to indicate where our scores fall and not for determining pass/fail. Pass/fail depends on actual scores.
 
I somehow dont observe the obsession with the results....
They have no way of effecting how we prepare for the exam...
Creating websites etc.. are an overkill..

So I think we should just study hard and get it over with...
 
I think that cfasuccess is a fine website and a nice complement to this one. The guy who made (RichardZhang) used to post here faily often. Study hard, but results are important too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top