So I passed P and FM. Which one should I do next?

[AndrewH]

I've decided that I am not going to attempt taking two exams at a time again. Once was enough. I've heard exam M is harder than exam C. Now I know I'm going to have to take both of them anyway, but does anyone have any insight as to which one might be a little easier? Does C assume prior knowledge from M or vice versa? Anyone know?

[wat]

I've decided that I am not going to attempt taking two exams at a time again. Once was enough. I've heard exam M is harder than exam C. Now I know I'm going to have to take both of them anyway, but does anyone have any insight as to which one might be a little easier? Does C assume prior knowledge from M or vice versa? Anyone know?

Exam C is very loosely based on Exam M. The basic principles (or at least a very minimal understanding of them) from Exam M are needed for Exam C. You could probably pick them up in an hour or so - maybe some notation here and there and the general concept of survival rates.

I guess you could say that M is "difficult", but since it's been revised from the Course 3 syllabus, a lot of the harder material was removed from the exam. For the life side, it's probably the most specific material. It's always good to have a knowledge of Life Contingencies before getting a position in a life company.

[Krieger]

Wat, do you happen to know what portions of Actuarial Mathematics I'd need to read for exam C? I've come across the notations for p and q in Loss Models, but I don't know what they mean.

[wat]

Wat, do you happen to know what portions of Actuarial Mathematics I'd need to read for exam C? I've come across the notations for p and q in Loss Models, but I don't know what they mean.

Well, if it's any indication, I passed Course 4 before passing Exam M.

The p's and q's are part of it (probability of survival and death, respectively). Those are well explained in Bowers (Actuarial Mathematics), but here's a brief lesson:

t_p_x, where the t and x are subscripts, is the symbol for "the probability a person currently age x surviving for t years until the age x+t". So, 10_p_50 is the probability that a 50-year old (right now) survives until age 60.

t_q_x is "the probability a person currently age x dies within the next t years - he/she does not reach age x+t". So, 10_q_50 is the probability that a 50-year old (now) does not reach age 60.

t and x do not have to be integers, but the numbers get a little more complicated when they're not. Chapter 3 and others of Actuarial Mathematics discusses this issue (Assumptions of Fractional Ages).

*One more note: if t = 1 (survive or die in 1 year), then you leave off the 1. So, p_50 is the probability of a 50-year old surviving for a year.

Anyway, other than that, you may have to know a few things like limited loss variables [ (X ^ d) ] or mean excess loss [ (X - d)+ ], which are covered in one of the chapters in Loss Models (I apologize - I don't have the book with me, so I'm not quite sure which chapter it's in). Other than that, Exam C deals with a different section of the loss models material - namely survival analysis and credibility.

[Ken]

Well, if it's any indication, I passed Course 4 before passing Exam M.

The p's and q's are part of it (probability of survival and death, respectively). Those are well explained in Bowers (Actuarial Mathematics), but here's a brief lesson:



Anyway, other than that, you may have to know a few things like limited loss variables [ (X ^ d) ] or mean excess loss [ (X - d)+ ], which are covered in one of the chapters in Loss Models (I apologize - I don't have the book with me, so I'm not quite sure which chapter it's in). Other than that, Exam C deals with a different section of the loss models material - namely survival analysis and credibility.

Isn't mean excess loss, e(d) = E[(X-d)+]/S(d)?

[wat]

Isn't mean excess loss, e(d) = E[(X-d)+]/S(d)?

And that's why I'm done with Exam M.