Skipping L3 to focus on experience, thoughts?

A

archived_user

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2026
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
I’m contemplating about skipping L3 next year and devoting my free time to other activities that I think will be more beneficial in the near term. I’m in the industry but I’m mainly doing operational work, and so if I want to research companies and improve my tech skills e.g VBA, R and Bloomberg I have to do it on my free time. As you know if you choose to study all your free time goes to the exam. My concern is passing Level 3 without much practical experience. So I’m thinking I’d rather be a L3 candidate with tech skills who has created some decent reports on companies than someone who has passed all 3 exams but not much else to show for it.
Thoughts? Anyone else in the same boat?
 
I would opt in to take L3 so you can get it out of the way. Not sure if the technical skills you will learn from studying on your free time will be viewed more positively when compared to passing all three CFA exams. If you’re not doing the buy side work, the second closest thing to show your interest and knowledge is passing the CFA exams, and L3 is supposedly the most relevant exam to the buy side work.
 
thx for your input. So you think someone who passed L3 but little practical experience would be more competitive than a L3 candidate with better tech skills and real experience?
 
What “tech skills” are you going to learn? If you’re doing this for your resume, people care about quantifiable and recognized certifications, and not that you claim to have read some book about coding or written some “research” that no one read. So you should take L3 instead of dicking around with aimless unappreciated projects.
It’s different if these side projects immediately enhance your current job, since improving work performance is usually the #1 way to career advancement.
 
Thanks Ohai
The “tech skills” I’m hoping to learn are VBA and Bloomberg first then R. My idea was learn these so I can incorporate them in my research. You make some good points I guess I just have it in my head that passing L3 with little work experience wouldn’t be all that marketable.
 
^Passing L3 with no experience is better than NOT passing L3 with no work experience.
 
Bachatero2014 wrote:
Thanks Ohai
The “tech skills” I’m hoping to learn are VBA and Bloomberg first then R. My idea was learn these so I can incorporate them in my research. You make some good points I guess I just have it in my head that passing L3 with little work experience wouldn’t be all that marketable.
Click to expand...
These are good goals longer-term but you’ve got to strike while the iron is hot. If you put it off, it increases your chances of losing momentum and letting this die on the vine. Only a handful of people really know the power of VBA, etc., but everybody knows and wants CFA charterholders. Getting the charter puts more credibility on your “research” and can maybe get you closer to a position where it matters, until then, it’s possible that unless you’re already a known quantity, people would dismiss your research as the unfocused wanderings of a back-office lackey and CFA washout.
 
I agree with what everyone else said. Just to respond to your question, here’s what I think. Real experience > L3 > everything else. If you can the real experience from you work, like doing fundamental research or building models for PMs, then that would be the first thing I’d focus on. BUT it doesn’t seem to be the case, and even if that’s the case, you should do L3 anyway because everyone works AND studies for L3. So passing L3 would be the most logical next step I’d focus on.
 
I was hoping to get real experience during my free time. Knock out some reports and develop models for the PM. But a lot of good points have been made to take L3 so I may reconsider.
 
Yeah dude DO level 3 now. The longer you put it off, the older you get and the harder it will be to finish it off.
If we were hiring, having CFA next to your name looks alot better than having “VBA and Bloomberg skills” somewhere in the middle.
 
The general consensus is to take L3. I didn’t think the answer would be all that obvious. I thought focusing on research or job search would be reasonable alternatives. Although the sample size is small in this thread everyone has made good points and I’m glad I brought it up.
 
Experience trumps all, but in your case, I would say get L3 over with. UNLESS you literally got your foot in the door with a real investment analyst job, then L3 becomes far less important.
Here you are choosing between L3 and self learning, and in the case I’d lean towards finishing the CFA program
 
Yes, because once you have your charter, you can add this to your resume, making you stand out a bit more from the applicants stack.
On the other hand, having learned some useful skills will be an advantage only “after” you bag the new job / position you seek.
 
You’ll also (likely) get a bit rusty on the material, which will just make it that fraction harder to complete L3. I’d echo what others have said, but add explicitly, that if what you’re doing at work or on the side will have a higher immediate impact on your value–read income–and immediate job prospects at the firm where you are, then that should be your first priority.
Also, I don’t know what stage of life you are in, but if you don’t have a family yet or this is a time where you have limited personal commitments outside of work and there’s a possibility that will change before you get back to L3, then get the stressful, time consuming studying done now.
 
I’m would be skeptical of the true magnitude of his achievements, if some random back office dude looking for a job told me that he spent the last 6 months “practicing VBA, like for real”. It’s better to have something quantifiable on the resume…
 
ohai wrote: I’m would be skeptical of the true magnitude of his achievements, if some random back office dude looking for a job told me that he spent the last 6 months “practicing VBA, like for real”. It’s better to have something quantifiable on the resume…
Click to expand...
What’s not quantifiable?
It’s similar to for real. If that ain’t quantifiable, I don’t know what is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top