Studying a company's financials: Getting your hands dirty.

W

wegowayback

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2026
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
what i really implied is that it's not the # of people taking the tests - it's the type of people, and their motivation. you cant just offer the exams to anyone with a check for $350 and expect the charter to keep its reputation. if stanford business school got rid of the application and just started letting anyone with a tuition check get an mba there, what do you think would happen? well, when IT/ops/sales people are able to get this thing despite rarely if ever having to actually put the material to use, it suggests that maybe the exams and charter arent as elite as everyone originally thought.

ideally, i would like to see the CFAI have you submit your current job to them to apply for the exam. no specific time limit on that job would be required. if you're doing something where the cfa material would have little or no relevance, you're denied. if you do qualify, they remind you that they'll be doing a thorough work experience check when/if you pass level 3, and that if found to be lying, you can kiss those 2.5+ years of studying down the drain becase they're not giving you the charter.

please understand that although it may come off this way, im honestly not trying to demean IT/sales/ops/etc folks...sorry if it sounds like i'm being snobby about it
 
Like Super, I too don't understand the brouhaha about who should be sitting for these exams:

(1) it's their (candidate's) life and they should be the sole judge of whether they will accrue any benefit from taking the exam with or without experience.
(2) CFAI has a stringet work experience requirement to get the charter.
(3) Market decides if passing all 3 levels and not having an experience has any worth.

Honestly, I detect a subliminal, if not overt, hostility owing to self-preservation on the part of people already in the industry. And watch it become hysterical when you bring up the rising number of candidates in India and China (yeah, the flood is coming). But surely being the worthy scions of the Street you believe in markets?
 
Yup, but I believe in cartels even more so.

That's tongue in cheek, but hides a truth.

If we maintain the quality of CFA candidates and charterholders then we maintain the value that it holds - which is in the interest of every aspiring charterholder.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at Wednesday, September 13, 2006 at 08:44AM by DeadCat.
 
DeadCat Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> If we maintain the quality of CFA candidates

CFAI is doing a good job of filtering out the candidates in the exams. Their tests measure -basic- proficiencies required of an analyst and if more people achieve that level by whatever means, so be it. You cannot gripe about the absolute number of people passing the exam increasing as it is just due to more people taking the exam. However, the flip side is that more people are failing as well (in absolute numbers). Plus the work experience remains a significant barrier to the charter and was recently increased. it would be worrisome had the CFAI lowered the MPL to maintain the pass rate, which obviously is not the case.

Again, market (e.g. you as the hiring manager) decides whether you find someone with all 3 levels passed competent for the job.

and
> charterholders then we maintain the value that it
> holds - which is in the interest of every aspiring
> charterholder.

I would be for continuing education since finance is a rapidly evolving field.
 
Wego/Deadcat

As an example, anyone with qualifying educational experience can sit for the CPA exam, but you still need qualifying experience (in most states) to get your license.

It's the rigorous test that's respected, not the experience requirement.


What you also don't get (my guess is that you are both young and inexperienced, or older but with tunnel vision) is the value of someone who is in a BOM or (IT especially) position getting this certification.

Having had to work with programmers, and watch other front office types work with programmers, I can tell you that in general these groups do not at all speak the same language. Speaking mostly from aan accounting perspective, I can tell you that working with a programmer, no matter howw sharp he is, is torture if he doesn't understand fundamental accounting rules, reporting requirements, etc.

There is a tremendous value to having support people who speak the same language as they people they work for/wwith, and having go thru the same prfessional certification is a great way to acomplish this.

And Wego - your Stanford analogy is just retarded because Stanford PHTSICALLY IS INCAPABLE of delivering the exact same quality program to a larger number of applicants/students, while CFAI is not similarly constrained. A better analogy would be:

What if anyone could go out and get an MBA from some school, wouldn't it devalue the significance of an MBA across the board for everyone who has one?

Anyone can, and it doesn't.
 
super, i am neither too inexperienced or too old with tunnel vision.

first, IT and BOM's dont get cfa's so they can converse better with front office people. they get it to help land interviews for analyst positions. that is not the purpose of the cfa. if their goal is to communicate better with front office, they should develop their own studies - the cfa itself is unecessary. second, while i agree it could in some cases be helpful for IT/ops to have investment knowledge, the idea that they would need to have passed all 3 levels of the cfa to really add value is crazy. the opportunities for IT/ops to put into practice cfa material are few and far between. even if they just wanted to learn more about investment analysis just because it would make them a better IT/ops person, they'd really only need to cover about 1/2 of the material on L1, and maybe L2.

people who dont have qualifying work experience yet sign up for the cfa anwyay are too shortsighted to understand that they wont get the charter. they're desparate, they want something to put on their resume showing they're trying to stand out and move away from whatever it is they're doing.

i hear what you're saying about having the exams be difficult, thereby being a de facto method of screening. this is a good point, but the problem i see is that with so many people now sitting for the exams, a high failure rate can only do so much.

my stanford analogy is accurate, you're taking it too literally.
 
I think that the CFAI should do a better job of educating the industry (employers, potential candidates, etc...) about the difference between a CFA Charterholder and a CFA Candidate.
 
wegowayback Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> people who dont have qualifying work experience
> yet sign up for the cfa anwyay are too
> shortsighted to understand that they wont get the
> charter. they're desparate, they want something
> to put on their resume showing they're trying to
> stand out and move away from whatever it is
> they're doing.
>
>

So what's wrong with this? Don't you try desperately to achieve what you desire? It has worked for some and may be not for others. I don't see why we have to proactively keep people away from taking the exam. If they are not up to it, they will fail. If they pass but don't have the experience, market will decide their fate. As long as CFAI doesn't lower the MPL, I don't see how it impacts the profession (it may impact you) as employers are really not as stupid to regard a candidates w/ and w/o job experience the same.
 
imp Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think that the CFAI should do a better job of
> educating the industry (employers, potential
> candidates, etc...) about the difference between a
> CFA Charterholder and a CFA Candidate.

I said the same thing awhile back in this thread:

The only thing the CFAI should do is try to market a more distinct line between chartholders and those whom have passed level 3 but do not have the required work experience.

Everyone needs to just concentrate on my words of wisdom for now on. Please address future questions to 'Danny Boy' or 'DB'.
 
Wegowayback - you sound a bit insecure. Are you really so concerned about the additional competition that todays CFA candidates may bring to the market? Besides, if you have the work experience, an employer isn't going to care as much about the CFA designation as they are about how well you did in your previous job.
 
not insecure, just annoyed that cfai doesnt do much to protect the reputation of the charter. why would i be against people moving up in the world, doing what really interests them? i started out in a back office, i know first hand what it's like. my point is simply that a) participating in the cfa program, despite what many people convince themselves, will not have the desired effect of helping get a better job and b) by doing this anyway, it devalues the reputation of the charter by showing that anyone can go through the exam process (even if work experience will ultimately prevent them from obtaining a charter).

i guess if it actually significantly affected peoples' chances of landing better interviews/jobs i probably wouldnt have an issue, but since it rarely does, what's the point?
 
It seems you guys are just pissed cuz anyone who can do 7th grade math and study a couple hours a day can get this credential. The work requirement is ridiculous, CFA exams aren't that hard and if you need a stringent work requirement to allow someone to take the exam to keep the passing numbers down, it shows that the exams are easy, its just that the red tape is the problem. Someone could make a credential where 15 years of experience is required to get it, that doesnt make the credential "hard" or worthy of respect. Anyone of average intelligence with a decent work ethic can pass these, I do not know why people give so much respect to the credential, it should be what your actual job is that gets the respect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top