View Full Version : Post-exam discussions
How'd it go?
I was a bit surprised at some of the topics (both those I knew and didn't know). They also didn't seem to cover too much material, given that there were so few [large] questions.
Oh, and there were 3 AFE exam takers at my center.
_BullDog_
05-11-2007, 08:28 PM
How'd it go?
I was a bit surprised at some of the topics (both those I knew and didn't know). They also didn't seem to cover too much material, given that there were so few [large] questions.
Oh, and there were 3 AFE exam takers at my center.
I agree. I was disappointed by the limited coverage of the material. Too many points were tied up in a handful of topics. I don't really know how to feel about how I did.
How about questions that were just "wtf?"
Any of those for you guys?
I personally was clueless about a few of the topics...PBR being one of them.
niko27
05-11-2007, 08:44 PM
PBR screwed me up too. I was disappointed with how I did but I guess we'll see. I had about 40-50 lists partly memorized, and got to use 1 small one worth about 1 point.
There were 9 writers where I was (NYC)
other odd (unexpected) questions (IMO) - some of which I actually knew, some not - were copula, MR2 calculation, and the Franchise value question (among others that I can't recall now).
I also thought it odd that they asked no ERM/RM best practices questions (other than the 1 or 2 pt G30 recommendation question).
I'm also pissed about the significant number of Eagle questions, given that the whole issue didn't make any sense to me (since there was no explanation of what eagle actually was).
_BullDog_
05-11-2007, 09:03 PM
reduced-form approach screwed me. PBR I was somewhat familar with so I think I did okay on that one. MR2 I was able to do most of that except the actual calculation and explaining part of the formula. And the copla one I was just pulling stuff out of my :moon2:, didn't have a clue. Was a little lost on Franchise value as well.
_BullDog_
05-11-2007, 09:05 PM
This was definately skewed more toward the finance than ERM I thought.
This was definately skewed more toward the finance than ERM I thought.
I agree - lots of finance topics: securitization, reinsurance, modeling, credit risk, hedging and derivatives, reserves, etc.
I saw very little about risk (just a few "list the risks in this product" type questions) and risk management
jelizmanning
05-12-2007, 05:49 PM
I was so frustrated b/c I knew the Franchise Value question but didn't get to it because at the last second, I remembered what the internal credit rating stuff was. MR2 really screwed me up. As did computing the hedge value for Eagle. And I used the wrong reinsurance form for modco so I'm not sure I'll get any points.
jelizmanning
05-12-2007, 05:53 PM
There were only 2 AFE-ers in my location, me and another person.
jelizmanning
05-12-2007, 05:56 PM
This exam was definitely about luck of the draw because there were a lot of things not even covered. Whoever wrote that one calculation question for Actex was amazing, because there was no way I would have known how to do that one otherwise. I kind of wish I had been able to recognize more of the calc questions though. I feel like I can never pick out the calc questions they would actually ask on this exam, but as soon as I see it, I realize that they can ask it.
...Whoever wrote that one calculation question for Actex was amazing, because there was no way I would have known how to do that one otherwise....
which one?
beckeelyn
05-13-2007, 12:00 AM
Just to make you guys feel better, I think I started crying before the exam was over. I got a 5 on the Finance Exam in the fall and I studied my butt off the last six months. I thought I had this exam nailed.
I don't think that I answered half of the questions. I'm so disappointed. I'm not sure what happened but I'm 100% sure that I didn't pass. Where did those exam questions come from - there were definitely some obsure topics. I've read every page of the reading material and there were a few questions I didn't even know what they were asking about. I've done fairly well on the exams up until this point and I am so disappointed I'm not quite sure what do to at this point. I could have been done last fall if I had just gotten a few extra points and now I'm looking at least another year. Is this really what the SOA is striving for? I feel like I can speak intelligently on pretty much all of the main topics on the Finance/ERM exam even though they have absolutely nothing to do with my job, I guess I just didn't memorize enough note cards. OK - I'm done complaining. Just another 6 months of my life is wasted. I guess I'll just be a career ASA...
finger-crossed and wait for the final due day.....:tfh:
IhateExam
05-13-2007, 10:41 AM
Just to make you guys feel better, I think I started crying before the exam was over. I got a 5 on the Finance Exam in the fall and I studied my butt off the last six months. I thought I had this exam nailed.
I don't think that I answered half of the questions. I'm so disappointed. I'm not sure what happened but I'm 100% sure that I didn't pass. Where did those exam questions come from - there were definitely some obsure topics. I've read every page of the reading material and there were a few questions I didn't even know what they were asking about. I've done fairly well on the exams up until this point and I am so disappointed I'm not quite sure what do to at this point. I could have been done last fall if I had just gotten a few extra points and now I'm looking at least another year. Is this really what the SOA is striving for? I feel like I can speak intelligently on pretty much all of the main topics on the Finance/ERM exam even though they have absolutely nothing to do with my job, I guess I just didn't memorize enough note cards. OK - I'm done complaining. Just another 6 months of my life is wasted. I guess I'll just be a career ASA...
I totally feel you. I cried 3 times - after morning session, after afternoon session, and when I'm back home.
stillH2O
05-13-2007, 11:32 AM
I totally feel you. I cried 3 times - after morning session, after afternoon session, and when I'm back home.
Sounds like your exam questions was not very balanced. Could it be a repeat of Fall 2005? I heard from friends who took the exam in Fall 2005, that SOA scr8wed up the exam questions, ie, putting erm in finance, and putting ILA in pensions, etc... ( not sure about the details though). SOA addmitted that they messed up, and for everyone who took the Fall exams, they allowed them to do PD ( instead of having to write the DP exam). Please don't quote me, all these was hear-say....
niko27
05-13-2007, 02:57 PM
Sounds like your exam questions was not very balanced. Could it be a repeat of Fall 2005? I heard from friends who took the exam in Fall 2005, that SOA scr8wed up the exam questions, ie, putting erm in finance, and putting ILA in pensions, etc... ( not sure about the details though). SOA addmitted that they messed up, and for everyone who took the Fall exams, they allowed them to do PD ( instead of having to write the DP exam). Please don't quote me, all these was hear-say....
A little bit off - it was pension, and I believe what happened was that there were some Canadian questions on the U.S. test. The questions in this test were from the syllabus, but just from obscure areas and more difficult than one might expect.
I had a theory (that turned out wrong) that with so much more material on this exam, the SOA would ask more broad questions to see if you had read and understood all the material, which in my opinion is more valuable than knowing how to do every little problem possible. I kept track of how much time I spent studying, and it ended up being 450.75 hours, which I think should be sufficient to pass. Maybe my studying methods weren't ideal, but in that amount of time there was no way for me to learn everything on the syllabus in the amount of detail required to ace the exam.
jelizmanning
05-13-2007, 06:58 PM
which one?
the reduced form approach question
the reduced form approach question
yes, me too...
Signumx
05-13-2007, 09:29 PM
There were two AFE takers in my room, me and one other guy, and he walked out right after the read thru time ended.
finger-crossed and wait for the final due day.....:tfh:
Two AFE exam takers (including me) in my classroom.
When will SOA post the result?
Good luck to everyone.
Two AFE exam takers (including me) in my classroom.
When will SOA post the result?
Good luck to everyone.
Good Luck to you too :toast:
_BullDog_
05-14-2007, 07:34 AM
Two AFE exam takers (including me) in my classroom.
When will SOA post the result?
Good luck to everyone.
In the month of july.
boocooper
05-14-2007, 10:13 AM
Only exam taker in my area. It just seemed like a typical exam from the SOA. The questioned that asked to compare CARVM reserves to PBR, was CARVM reserves in the Syllabus?
Should we attempt to reconstruct the exam and figure out potential answers, or is that too painful?
Chip Douglas
05-14-2007, 11:37 AM
I had a theory (that turned out wrong) that with so much more material on this exam, the SOA would ask more broad questions to see if you had read and understood all the material, which in my opinion is more valuable than knowing how to do every little problem possible. I kept track of how much time I spent studying, and it ended up being 450.75 hours, which I think should be sufficient to pass. Maybe my studying methods weren't ideal, but in that amount of time there was no way for me to learn everything on the syllabus in the amount of detail required to ace the exam.
I was right there with you on the same theory, and I still contend that would have been a better way to test whether you understood the material.
The other thing that pissed me off was that there were some concepts that they tried to explain in the exam question. The one I'm thinking about was with reinsurance and calculating the surplus strain. I feel like I didn't really read about that anywhere. Why try to teach us something new on the exam instead of testing us over something we were already supposed to know?
Big Ern
05-14-2007, 01:12 PM
Hopefully the graders take the "hardness" of the exam into context when it is graded and still pass around 50 - 55% of the people. That is my only hope because I'm pretty sure out of the 120 possible points I got about 35 - 40.
:oops:
My recollection:
morning session
Q1-4 (42 pts): case study
Q1 - eagle Q on debt for the transaction
Q2 (14 pts) - PBR; CTE and probability of values higher than CTE; CTE vs Var & coherency
Q3 - Eagle value of hedge; financial advisor salary and whether utility < or > with hedge
Q4 - hedging initiative model error & testing; three G30 recommendation violations
Q5 (5pts) : ?
Q6 (a=1pt; b,c=4pts) - some risk rating question (name 9 steps; apply them to determine whether or not to give loan)
Q7 (4pts) - franchise value; ROE
Afternoon session
Q8 (a=5pts; b=2pts) - 3 yr credit spread calculation; validation of model
Q9 - long question with like 5 parts?
Q10 - reinsurance? mod co & YRT strain; 4 types of debt?; securitization vs reinsurance
Q11 - copula? correlation matrix & diversification benefits; advantages of copula; ranking of reserves produced by various methods
Q12 - FPC model? FPC pieces; calculate MR2; 2 actions to decrease MR2
Q13 (4pts) - four part queston?
? = unsure about question topic.
jelizmanning
05-14-2007, 05:58 PM
Afternoon session
Q9 - long question with like 5 parts?
? = unsure about question topic.
I think this one had CTE on it as well. I think coherency was here instead of in question 2 (but I could be wrong). It was a 3-pager, I remember that.
There was a question about acquisitions and synergy value in the afternoon, but I can't remember which one it was.
jelizmanning
05-14-2007, 06:01 PM
There was also a GMWB question, but I can't remember which one that one was either.
Didn't we have to define EVA as well? Was that possibly the small morning question.
jaegar
05-15-2007, 11:24 AM
My sentiments are the same as everyone elses. The concentration of topics was highly surprising. They tried to dable other topics in by making them a part e or f of a problem. All in all, I think the questions were fair. None of the questions seemed unreasonable or outlandish. Mostly, you just had to know the right 20% of the syllabus. This is most likely a symptom of the breadth of the required reading.
It was definely frustrating and demoralizing reading through a problem, knowing what it is talking about, and knowing where on the sylabus it is from, but just not being versed enough in that specific topic to be able to provide a "passing" caliber answer.
_BullDog_
05-15-2007, 11:31 AM
My sentiments are the same as everyone elses. The concentration of topics was highly surprising. They tried to dable other topics in by making them a part e or f of a problem. All in all, I think the questions were fair. None of the questions seemed unreasonable or outlandish. Mostly, you just had to know the right 20% of the syllabus. This is most likely a symptom of the breadth of the required reading.
It was definely frustrating and demoralizing reading through a problem, knowing what it is talking about, and knowing where on the sylabus it is from, but just not being versed enough in that specific topic to be able to provide a "passing" caliber answer.
The more I think about it thought the more it starts to really bother me that with a 2700 page syllabus they focused on so few of the topics.
Why give us that many pages of material when the test is going to cover so little of it?
so, I take it, we're giving up on the attempt to reconstruct the exam?
niko27
05-16-2007, 11:18 AM
Are they releasing this exam?
campbell
05-16-2007, 12:09 PM
Are they releasing this exam?
Yes.
http://soa.org/education/resources/edu-multiple-choice-essay-examinations.aspx
Yes.
http://soa.org/education/resources/edu-multiple-choice-essay-examinations.aspx
Thank you. I asked about this multiple times on the chat with candidates forum and hadn't heard anything.
campbell
05-16-2007, 02:04 PM
I just found out yesterday when I was looking at old 4/C exams.
Oh man~~They are there...............
wow. I feel much worse about this now.
can we at least figure out answers for the numerical problems, since if I didn't get those, I have no chance of passing.
Calculation questions: (answers below are mine; if you believe they are wrong, don't be shy!)
Morning
2d.
2e. i CTE60 = 341.325; CTE80 = 349.4
2e. ii mean of sample = 324.92; std dev of sample = 17.97; so P(X>CTE80) = 1-N(1.36) = 1-.91 = 9%
2e. iii P(X>CTE60) = 1-N(.91) = 1-.82 = 18%
2e. iv CTE80 is more that 1 std dev away; CTE60 is only .9 std dev away
4a. i
4a. ii
4b.
7a. i
7a. ii
7a. iii
Afternoon
8a.
9b. i
9b. ii
9b. iii
9e. i
9e. ii
9e. iii
10b.
11a.
11b.
12c.
12d.
ETA: I'll add a few more tonight, but please contribute solutions/answers since I can't do all the problems myself.
Sorry to be completely clueless about your exam, but I noticed that Investment Guarantees was a part of your syllabus.
Did you find the Wilkie model to be testable on the exam?
campbell
06-06-2007, 05:33 AM
Agh! No. Except maybe as a little list regarding its properties. There's no way you can actually be expected to implement it in any way.
jelizmanning
06-08-2007, 07:27 PM
Did anyone see the article in NAAJ about coherent risk measures? I think it had to do with distortions or something like that. Anyway, an FSA in my department managed to randomly flip open to it in my presence. I pointed him to the article that was on our syllabus for his reading pleasure because he had no background knowledge of it. One of these days, I'll get to the point where that kind of stuff is for my reading pleasure and I'm not being tested on it. Then I will be able to put it down if I don't understand it instead of forcing myself to understand every small detail.
jelizmanning
06-08-2007, 07:27 PM
The article I was referring to was in the most recent NAAJ.
campbell
06-09-2007, 07:45 AM
Haven't had a chance to read it yet.
...
Okay, just skimmed over it. It seems to be saying something about the usefulness of adding further requirements for risk measures beyond the basic requirements for cohernecy, i.e., it seems that adding more requirements makes the risk measure have to be the expected value. It's interesting from a non-result sort of way, but I didn't know if anyone had been clamoring for more stringent requirements on risk measures. The ones for coherency seem sufficient for all practical purposes.
vBulletin® v3.7.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.