Can someone compare Stalla/Schweser L1 guides?

N

numi

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2026
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
Hi all, I plan to start studying for CFA Level 1 by September and was wondering if anyone who has seen both Stalla AND Schweser L1 study guides could compare and contrast the two.

I've seen a ton of feedback from people advocating one or the other, and I assume both of them work, but was wondering how they compare. As far as my preferences go, the most important traits in a good review guide are organization and readability. Is one of these guides superior to the other? Does one have better content than the other?

Thanks in advance for your feedback.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at Friday, July 28, 2006 at 05:29PM by numi.
 
numi, I can't compare but here are my 2 cents. For personal reasons, I just studied Schweser for 3 weeks full time (~ 6 hours each day), was able to do two end-to-end passes through the books for everything except economics, which I studied for 2.5 days before the exam. I solved all the problems at the end of each reading (they are significantly easier than the exam itself) and I did no practice tests. And I passed with >70% in all but two sections. In economics I was in 50-70% range which was understandable but great from my point of view. But I was dissappointed by my equity analysis score (the other 50-70%). This is my strongest topic and something I did for living like you. However, I think I have only myself to blame here for stupid mistakes and Schweser was OK.

I found the coverage of derivatives in Schweser the worst of all topics but that was not a problem as it is not weighted much and I have a pretty good knowledge of the topic from my MBA. Some of the material for quant seemed given a cursory coverage as well.

My summary assessment for Schweser is:

FSA - good
Equity/FI - good.
Alternative investments - fair - I just felt it was very superficial material and if the test had scratched even a bit below the surface, I would have been in trouble.
Econ - I don't know.
Derivatives - bad
Quant - fair.

Both organization and readability are good. Except perhaps for quant where, perhaps by the nature of the subject itself, readability was tortuous.

However, since I passed only using the Schweser, I would rate the course excellent esp. if you already have a fairly recent background in finance, which is the case for you.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at Friday, July 28, 2006 at 05:52PM by CFAAtlanta.
 
Hi CFAAtlanta, thank you for your analysis. even though you didn't use Stalla, your breakdown of each section is pretty helpful. My quant background is not as strong as the other areas, and my only exposure to derivatives was in two college classes -- I don't do anything with them on my job. If anyone here has used Stalla, can they please comment on its thoroughness in these sections? Also, is it advisable to purchase the Ethics book from CFAI?

Since most of you don't know me, I should give a bit of background information on myself. I work in sell-side research so I hope some of the CFA Level 1 material will be familiar to me. I also consider myself a quick learner and graduated with an economics degree from a top university. I just need a study guide that's readable, understandable, and relatively free from typographical errors.

Thanks in advance for your feedback.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at Friday, July 28, 2006 at 06:09PM by numi.
 
I haven't used Stalla before, so my comments pertain only to Schweser.

I got all the books except quants and econ when I studied for the June Level 1 exam. I found Schweser's coverage in econ and quants to be adequate, enough for me to score > 70% in both areas. However, I have an econ + quant background, so that may partially be the reason.

Derivaties: okay, considering the limited number of derivatives questions on the exam. Plus they were quite straight forward on the exam.

FSA: I read the text first, and after I understood the major concepts, I stuck with Schweser.

FI: I found the text to be better.

Alternative Investment: good summary. The text has too much information that are not on the exam. Just remember the differences between mutual funds vs ETFs...etc. Schweser does a good job of summing up the differences.

One thing that I really like about Schweser is their summary tables. For example, in the FSA section, Schweser will summarize the diifferent impacts to net income, ratios...etc when one uses FIFO vs LIFO inventory accounting. The summary tables helped me a ton on the exam.

I'm going with Schweser for level 2 again.
 
I developed my own mnemonic for LIFO/FIFO. Helped a lot!


LIFO = Less Inventory For Organization (on balance sheet)

LIFO = Less Income For Organization (on income statement, due to COGS)



FIFO = Fuller Inventory (line) For Organization

FIFO = Fuller Income (line) For Organization
 
OK but how about replying to the topic of this post
 
Sorry, just commenting on the immediately preceding post on how great schwesser was for going over the effects of FIFO and LIFO, among others...
 
I found a Chinese blog that compares the two:

"Stalla is detailed but the contents feel undigested. That's the advantage as well as its disadvantage. It is presented in points and subheadings like a textbook but after finishing its hard to tell if I truly understood the concepts. Critical concepts are not organized or stressed; therefore Stalla is best used as a reference tool rather than for exam prep, as it requires more comprehension. It's a good complement to either Shulman or Schweser.

Schweser is personally recommended, as the contents feel like they were digested and organized already by the editors. The whole process is like taking a class and is suitable for anyone with or without relevant backgrounds. Its Secret Sauce is undoubtedly the best!"

I tried to make the translation as smooth as possible but the meaning is there.
Source: http://cynthiaworld.spaces.msn.com/blog/cns!33C50262FEF55D8A!483.entry?_c11_blogpart_blogpart=blogview&_c=blogpart#comment
 
timball -- thanks so much for the thoughtful feedback. It's times like this where I wish my Chinese reading skills were better, though I'm sure I probably wouldn't have found that site on my own anyway. That's pretty impressive.

Also, can someone please give me a sense as to which study guides help distinguish the more important lessons from the less, or do both of them do a pretty good job in terms of highlighting the most critical material?

As a frame of reference, I plan to get only the Schweser guides or the Stalla guides. I'd probably only buy the CFAI text for Ethics. Is this recommended? I'm sure there's value in the CFAI textbooks, but I simply don't have the time to go through ALL of them and just want to cut to the chase.

Thanks in advance for all your help!
 
numi, the ethics book is free for download. see the link below:

http://www.cfapubs.org/toc/cpb/2005/2005/1

If I were you, I'd just get the Schweser notes. With your background, I'm sure you can handle most of the hard stuff in level 1 anyway.
 
Hi all -- thanks again for the thoughtful feedback. I really appreciate the comparative commentary, and of course, if anyone else has thoughts, please feel free to post.
 
Also, regarding CALCULATORS -- I know this is a question that's been asked a bunch of times as well too, so let me phrase it like this. Is there any knock on the HP calculator besides that it takes some time to get used to the Reverse Polish Notation calculations? Because aside from this point, the feedback I've seen concerning the HP 12C Platinum seems to indicate that it's a faster calculator, especially when it comes to running calcluations with a huge number of entries. Some people contend that this feature that is particularly meaningful for Level II and III exams where it can save you a bit of time. If the Reverse Polish Notation is the only knock on it, maybe I should just buy the HP and learn how to use it.

Would you agree, or do you think the TI BA II Plus Professional is a superior calculator in other aspects? Does it really matter what calculator I use?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top