Regarding Level II

[Enlighten_me]

Hi!
I am planning to take Level II in the future and I know is that Level I is a big leap to Level II. Since Level II is item set, does the Schweser Level II material have question banks in items set format too? What is the difference in approach when studying for Level I and Level II?

 

[hhcave]

Since Level II is item set, does the Schweser Level II material have question banks in items set format too?
Yes - Schweser example question sets (“vignettes”) seemed much easier to me than CFAI vignettes. As for which was more useful in terms of exam practice - I actually felt that the Schweser style was a closer fit (bizarre i know).
What is the difference in approach when studying for Level I and Level II?
Level I was all about ‘knowing a little bit about a lot of things’. Level II goes much deeper and is more about ‘knowing a lot about fewer, specialised areas’. Level I focused on short, light, quick questions spanning a huge syllabus - whereas in Level II you cover less topics/material, but there are big/long equations and valuation methodologies that you must master. Level II was more quantitative, but, if you are numerically strong, you may find it easier (??). Really understand the core fundamental (although difficult) calculation methodologies and you’ll be fine. Don’t memorise lots of random little facts like you may have done for Level I.

 

[Enlighten_me]

hhcave wrote:
Since Level II is item set, does the Schweser Level II material have question banks in items set format too?
Yes - Schweser example question sets (“vignettes”) seemed much easier to me than CFAI vignettes. As for which was more useful in terms of exam practice - I actually felt that the Schweser style was a closer fit (bizarre i know).
What is the difference in approach when studying for Level I and Level II?
Level I was all about ‘knowing a little bit about a lot of things’. Level II goes much deeper and is more about ‘knowing a lot about fewer, specialised areas’. Level I focused on short, light, quick questions spanning a huge syllabus - whereas in Level II you cover less topics/material, but there are big/long equations and valuation methodologies that you must master. Level II was more quantitative, but, if you are numerically strong, you may find it easier (??). Really understand the core fundamental (although difficult) calculation methodologies and you’ll be fine. Don’t memorise lots of random little facts like you may have done for Level I.

I appreciate your length reply. Yes I agree with you with my experience in Level I, the Schweser material was more practical than the CFAI(too long).
Thanks again for the heads-up on what to expect for Level II.

 

[ltj]

My approach didn’t change all that much from L1 to L2, at least in the first few months. Just do the readings, try some EOCs, keep chugging along if you get stuck. Review, more EOCs/blue boxes. Mocks, online practice assessments provided by the CFAI, more mocks. Do a couple timed ones. Identify your weak areas.
When you do start doing actual vignettes, I found it easier to read the questions first and then go back to the vignette. This was the general consesus at the board here if I remember correctly. It is a definite time saver come exam time.
Trying to play the topic weighting guessing game is a waste of time IMO. You obviously want to be strong in Equity and FRA, but if you’re poor in the smaller or medium weighted sections that can undo all the good you’ve done in the big topics. I personally hammered FRA because I’m just horrible at it, but also Econ, Quant and AI at the end too. You may see topics about people flat out punting or ignoring certain topics because they’ve run out of time. Don’t put yourself in this position!