theories when not put in use tend to be forgotten, you are going to need a reference in a year or so anyway. its more about ongoing education and opportunities, and if you are interested in the alternative investment world (hedge funds, fofs, private equity, etc) you are better off with CAIA, and that statement is only growing stronger with time.
just look at what caia is all about and what ongoing activities it provides. its targeted towards alernative investment professionals period. there is a reason why the SEC is having its employees taking it, and not the CFA. there is also a reason why for now it is only 2 levels, like CFA was long time ago, and has a relatively high pass rate. hint, big fish need and want to take it, they are not really interested in putting in 3 years. once they pass, and membership numbers rise, it wont be that easy. finally, would a new designation charge 1k fees if there wasnt a market for it?
Sounds like a good designation. I'll certainly consider adding it once I'm done with my CFA series in June.
what Copernicus explained was intersting, they are also promoting themself in all asian countries now http://www.fundsmanagementworld.com/ http://www.terrapinn.com/2006/aia/ Dude, You don't need CAIA then, or give yourself a break, and take some fresh air
I disagree; the FRM is focused on Risk Management and Measurement applications, not on trading or technical analysis for trading purposes. For trading specific courses/charters/designations, the CMT might be a better alternative.
Heres my take on the CFA. I took level one last june and passed, BARELY. This is how I passed. For the entire month of May i studied 8-10 hours a day, every day. What youre supose to do is start in january and spread it out for 6 months. I however chose to do the condense version seeing as how I was studying for my finals and midterms second semester instead. Yes I took the CFA exam 1 month after I graduated college. Really I dont know how those old guys pass this test. I mean I just got done with 4 years of learning this crap at a decent business school and I struggled. Its not that the exam is hard, its just comprehensive as hell. Hehe so what happened was that instead of taking any of my "real job" offers in corporate finance, I turned them all down and went prop straight out of college. My CFA is a "backup" of sorts. Im taking Level II this june and from what I hear the jump from lvl 1 to lvl 2 is harder than straight up lvl 1 and the jump from lvl 2 to lvl 3. The pass rate on lvl 1 is 36%. The pass rate of lvl 2 is 36% (yeah only 1/3 of the 36% that actually passed level one will pass level two). The pass rate of lvl 3 is 50%. This means like only 5% make it through, on the first try at least. If you want to pass you have to buy the study books ie: stalla or schwester. I use schwester but just because its the first one I chose. The accounting section is what kills most people. Watch out for that one. Stupid FASB crap. I guess I got lucky that I graduated from the number one accounting school in the nation =P. As for relevancy, the CFA is basically the antithesis of trading. It is basically all portfolio theory such as CAPM, efficient fronteir, APT, fundamental ratios ect ect. Although there IS a tiny section on technical analysis. I actually got a head and shoulders question. Not even kidding. It showed a head and shoulders mattern and asked what it was. But i mean it was basically 2 questions out of an entire 6 hour exam. And even then they were just like "this is what technical analysis is" not that they were advocating its use. As for benefits, check out this website: http://www.analystforum.com/121304.shtml It gives a comparison of an mba vs a cfa. In the end you get paid more for having a cfa vs an mba, but if you have both, its even better. Ive also seen studies that did a DCF on an mba vs a cfa and the cfa won out. If you discount back the time and money spent vs the amount of compensation, cfa wins hands down. Conclusion, will getting a CFA make you a better trader? Nope. Will it help you in life? Its something that hiring managers like to see. It shows dedication, dicipline and a willingness to be proactive in your financial career. Doesnt have to mean you know how to manage a portfolio. Just that you are capable of hard work. Hell, in the very least it wont hurt you and you can spout off useless garbage that makes you look smart =). If anyone is actually taking it or considering taking it just drop me a pm. Id be happy to answer any questions. Cheers mates. Dave
Hi I am Varun from Bangalore. I am from non-finance background. But the current comapny I am working in is a complete finance related firm. My question is, does it make any sense for me to go for CFA?. Just to make myself more clear, although I come from engineering background, I am hugely interested in fiance and see it as a career. Basically I would like to switch from software to finance later. I have already done some courses in finance. In the pipeline I see MBA as an option 4-5 years later. Informally I keep on getting feed on fianace topics because I have to understand the thing before coding. Because of this involvement and my interest I was wondering if CFA is good for me. Regards Varun
I've been a tax accountant for many years and recently looking to swith into finance/investment. I am thinking about doing the CFA but don't have any relevant work experience. anyone thinks it is still a worthy journey at this age? btw, i had a double major in accounting and finance and i am pretty confident i can pass all 3 levels at the end.
I am a little confused by some of these posts. You MUST be currently employed within the investment business to be eligable for the CFA program. It is not an open program.