CFAbeatmeup wrote:
I’ll engage in this hypothetical. I agree this test seemed to guage width of knowledge and not depth, but it’s hard to say if they will do that in future tests.That’s what makes it so tough, the material is both wide and deep, and even if you know 70% of it perfectly, there’s no way you be certain you will pass. That’s frustrating, but we all knew what we were getting into, so… but, I disagree with that line of thinking with ethics.
I took the 80% road in Ethics and I think it hurt me because it’s a “either you know it all or you don’t know it” kind of section. Oddly enough, perhaps it was in the heat of the test, but I remember thinking the way questions were framed in Ethics would be unethical if we presented questions/data to clients in the same manner.
If I failed, it will be because I ignored the smaller sections (and Ethics, obvs). Things like FI, AI, PM, and Devs can add up. There’s a lot of speculation out there…a lot can be taken with a grain of salt. So I wish I would have ignored the advice to spend all your time on FRA, CF, and Equity (overexaggering a bit, but you get the point) and studied more on the smaller segs…especially PM.
Focus on relationships and theories. As an easy example (and in no way indicative of anything I may or may not have encountered on the test), you may forget exactly how to perform a capitalized asset writedown, but you know that it will lower net income this quarter and lower depreciation later (so higher net income later, ceteris paribus). As an aside, I felt Wiley’s 11th hour review was good for this.
I did the following advice this year, so it’s mostly a hangover from my first attempt, but don’t ignore the CFA material! Even if you’re using Schweser Notes, the EOCs and online questions from CFAI should be reviewed. I’d also not stress out about Kaplan’s mocks because they are generally harder than the test.