Quote:
Originally Posted by DaFonz
The exam isn't even nit picky. Only stupid people think it's nit picky. It's a stupid cash grab because the CSC knows that people have to take it. You don't even need a university degree to take the CSC. Bank tellers with high school diplomas do it!
The CSC gives you electronic materials. That's all you need.
There's maybe 20% overlap between the CFA and the CSC.. if that. They test completely different things. One is a canadian licensing exam that allows brokers to peddle their wares in the canadian securities industry whereas the other is supposedly prestigious designation that tests candidates on their ability to answer bullshit questions that never come up in real life.
CFA: Larry is a portfolio manager who drinks in the afternoons. He does his work in the morning. How should results be presented to clients?
CFA Answer: Larry's alchohol habit reflects poorly on his professionalism and violates CFA Code of Conduct. Had he not had a drinking habit, then results should be GIPS compliant.
Real world answer: No one cares that Larry drinks because his fund is a fully quant and generates returns in excess of 40% a year. In fact, clients love going to drink with him because he is fun.
|
hahha... That I agree with you... only one small aspect of the CFA program that's BS... as for the most of it, you do see it in real life, especially measuring portfolio performance using quant. Well, there's also another section that's b/s, the CFA material tells you that CMO is supposedly a "safe" investment, hahaha... we all know how that went
