PDA

View Full Version : Take exam FM and MFE?



dave134
May 19th 2008, 09:23 PM
I just passed P and now am looking to take more exams. I was thinking about taking FM and MFE both in November? Do you think this is a good idea? P was not bad for me as I only studied about 6 weeks and probably 80 hours total, but I am not as good with finance. Six months seems like plenty of time to prepare though....do you think I should do it?

alekhine4149
May 20th 2008, 11:46 AM
I just passed P and now am looking to take more exams. I was thinking about taking FM and MFE both in November? Do you think this is a good idea? P was not bad for me as I only studied about 6 weeks and probably 80 hours total, but I am not as good with finance. Six months seems like plenty of time to prepare though....do you think I should do it?

It depends on your level of free time and toughness. Both subjects are difficult to penetrate without a background in finance. In general I'd say no, but it sounds like you're very focused. Just be careful and don't underestimate either exam. I'm taking them both this sitting, but this turned out to be a dumb decision. I already took MFE and can say it's harder than P/1 - I probably failed.

There is no shortage of good guides for FM/2, but there is for the relatively new MFE. I used ASM and it was great, tough, and inspiring but ultimately didn't address all the questions I faced. Best of luck.

dave134
May 21st 2008, 03:10 PM
Hmm, how about MLC and FM? I really would like a good study guide and I think Dr. O has one for MLC and FM. Also, MLC I hear is more probability than finance which suits my strengths. I can handle finance too, but I just prefer probability. It might be hard to switch back and forth between studying for MLC and FM though considering they are different.

JDBreeze1
May 21st 2008, 08:48 PM
I've taken both FM and MFE, though not at the same time. I would NOT recommend trying both at once. You will need to spend a LOT more time studying for FM than you did for P - there is a lot more material. And, if you have a full-time job, that plus FM studying will keep you plenty busy.

MFE also involves a lot of time studying. I just took it last week and I'm pretty sure I failed. Between that and work I was very stressed out - I can't imagine trying to study for another exam along with that.

So, take FM and concentrate on kicking its butt. Then go for MFE later.

Elk
May 27th 2008, 09:27 PM
I agree. There is a phenomenal amount of material covered on FM. Exam P is much different. Get a good background in derivatives from FM and that will set the stage for MFE.

Brian2d
May 30th 2008, 04:02 PM
Hi....just took exam FM myself, and planning to take MFE in the Fall. My advice would be to start studying for FM, learn the content, and see where you are and when. If you feel ready in a couple months to take on another exam, go ahead. If not, don't. I would say start studying for FM and postpone a decision on MFE until you see how that goes.

AgBat
June 4th 2008, 12:57 PM
I just took FM on Monday, and I took MFE a couple weeks ago.

I was a math major in school and have little to no formal schooling in finance/economics. I spent a hard month studying for P, which I took at the end of February, and ended up getting an 8. I thought that was kind of a weak score, as I had seen a lot of the material on the exam already. After a couple weeks of break, I picked up Broverman's and McDonald's texts and went to work. I had never seen any of the material covered in either books before, so I was starting from ground zero. This was 2 months away from MFE and 2.5 months away from FM. My method of study was just read the chapters and do the practice problems. Other than the problems provided on the SOA website, I didn't use any other outside resources.

I was pretty confident going into MFE, but I'm not confident that I passed. The exam was really tough and it made me feel ill-prepared. A lot of other people are saying this though, so I'm not sure what to make of the experience. I guess I'll have a better idea when I get my score.

Needless to say, I was a little rattled going into FM. After the exam, my confidence had been fully restored. I found the exam to be quite easy and I think I might have gotten a 10, although I am expecting a 9.

I would say try for the double. People are saying that FM covers a ton of material, but I don't really agree with that. If you can value any cash flow at any time, you can answer 80% of the questions. Plus, the derivatives questions are elementary. If you don't pass MFE, atleast you have seen it and should be able to pass it the second time around.

Alex

Fermat83
June 9th 2008, 05:23 PM
I just took FM on Monday, and I took MFE a couple weeks ago.

I was a math major in school and have little to no formal schooling in finance/economics. I spent a hard month studying for P, which I took at the end of February, and ended up getting an 8. I thought that was kind of a weak score, as I had seen a lot of the material on the exam already. After a couple weeks of break, I picked up Broverman's and McDonald's texts and went to work. I had never seen any of the material covered in either books before, so I was starting from ground zero. This was 2 months away from MFE and 2.5 months away from FM. My method of study was just read the chapters and do the practice problems. Other than the problems provided on the SOA website, I didn't use any other outside resources.

I was pretty confident going into MFE, but I'm not confident that I passed. The exam was really tough and it made me feel ill-prepared. A lot of other people are saying this though, so I'm not sure what to make of the experience. I guess I'll have a better idea when I get my score.

Needless to say, I was a little rattled going into FM. After the exam, my confidence had been fully restored. I found the exam to be quite easy and I think I might have gotten a 10, although I am expecting a 9.

I would say try for the double. People are saying that FM covers a ton of material, but I don't really agree with that. If you can value any cash flow at any time, you can answer 80% of the questions. Plus, the derivatives questions are elementary. If you don't pass MFE, atleast you have seen it and should be able to pass it the second time around.

Alex

I just made the post at the top of the page called "Taking FM and MFE together", you guys might want to check that out. But I have to agree with Agbat in that I think the exam FM material is small, esspecially compared to exam P. I studied ~ 320 hours for P and passed with a 7, FM I have studied 85-90 hours (NO EXPERIENCE IN FINANCE) and I am confident in knowing 85% of the material. Agbat is right once you get the "hang" of evaluating cash flows you can solve 80% of the material. For example annuities, loan amort, bonds, bond amort, financial analysis, and DM are the core topics. Once you master annuities loan amort becomes easy, bond amort is virtually the same as loan amort and everything pretty much ties itself together in one big box of knowledge. Contrast this to exam P where I think I must of memorized 70-80 formulas as compared to FM's 30. Also in exam P depth of knowledge was tremendous and I can't say I feel the same for FM. I would say study FM first and if you can fly through the material proceed with MFE.

Bolyai
June 29th 2008, 11:12 AM
I just made the post at the top of the page called "Taking FM and MFE together", you guys might want to check that out. But I have to agree with Agbat in that I think the exam FM material is small, esspecially compared to exam P. I studied ~ 320 hours for P and passed with a 7, FM I have studied 85-90 hours (NO EXPERIENCE IN FINANCE) and I am confident in knowing 85% of the material. Agbat is right once you get the "hang" of evaluating cash flows you can solve 80% of the material. For example annuities, loan amort, bonds, bond amort, financial analysis, and DM are the core topics. Once you master annuities loan amort becomes easy, bond amort is virtually the same as loan amort and everything pretty much ties itself together in one big box of knowledge. Contrast this to exam P where I think I must of memorized 70-80 formulas as compared to FM's 30. Also in exam P depth of knowledge was tremendous and I can't say I feel the same for FM. I would say study FM first and if you can fly through the material proceed with MFE.

I agree, FM is relatively easy. Once you understand annuities and loan amortization, most of the rest follows naturally. The other topics, such as duration, immunization, and derivatives, are covered somewhat superficially and you don't need a lot of in-depth knowledge of those for the exam. The exam questions for FM were straightforward, and hardly any were tricky, unlike many of the questions on Exam P.

I haven't taken MFE yet, but from what I understand, the syllabus is fairly small, although you need to thoroughly understand the relevant material. I think taking both is do-able, if you start now and stick to a study schedule.

sohpmalvin
June 29th 2008, 02:46 PM
Going for both FM and MFE is doable, but not easy. MFE in spring 2008 was tough. Going for both FM and MLC sounds rather impossible, because MLC requires rather solid understanding in FM.

Bolyai
June 29th 2008, 03:51 PM
What about MFE and MLC at the same time?

sohpmalvin
June 29th 2008, 03:58 PM
What about MFE and MLC at the same time?

It might sound strange, but I think that doing MLC and MFE at the same time is more possible than FM and MLC. Because when you take MLC and MFE, I assume that you have done FM, and you are already equipped with the fundamental knowledge for studying MLC and MFE. You can't touch MLC at all if you are not prepared for FM.

But of course, you can arrange your time such that you start studying for MLC only after FM, but it is not secured: You don't even know whether or not you are prepared for the basic one (FM), not to say the advanced one (MLC)!