July 2018 IFM Exam

[ToBeAnActuaryOrNotToBe]

I thought that this exam was way easier than the MFE March sitting where I made a 5. I spent most of my studying time on the new material and terms. Felt confident on around 26 problems and did not do any practice exams on ADAPT. Did around 90 quizzes total though. Each quiz had anywhere between 4 to 7 questions each with around a EL 4 to 5 difficulty. Finished the exam with an hour left and spent the hour trying to solve the 4 problems I wasn't sure on.

[Msalazar1213]

Originally Posted by svobodny

Honestly, I am a little disappointed in this exam. I had an EL of 5.2 and also used TIA videos. I thought some questions on the exam were sort of odd ball, and my exam really didn't cover the scope of the syllabus. 4 of my questions were exotic options, which I just felt was too many for the weights from the syllabus. I felt confident only in 21 questions, and completely guessed on 4 and know i chose the wrong on 1. So unless I guessed right, I am looking at a 5. Comparing when I sat for MFE in march, this was much more difficult in my opinion. I didn't think the new material for IFM was difficult but my questions from the MFE material were extremely harder. I am just not happy with how little they tested the entirety of the syllabus, it was very concentrated to certain topics.

I completely agree. I thought the material tested was not at all representative of what was on the syllabus.
I was not tested at all on what was on the study notes with the exception of exotic options. I was very surprised by this. I also agree about the odd ball questions. I am in the same boat as you.

[svobodny]

Originally Posted by Msalazar1213

I completely agree. I thought the material tested was not at all representative of what was on the syllabus.
I was not tested at all on what was on the study notes with the exception of exotic options. I was very surprised by this. I also agree about the odd ball questions. I am in the same boat as you.

I mean honestly I know that its the first sitting of an exam but I thought the "old material" stuff was the more ridiculous. There was definitely new material stuff that I wasn't tested on but more of my issue lies with the old material stuff. I felt like I was prepared and now I probably will not pass because I feel like the exam was so centralized. Only felt good about 21 problems and guessed on some and know I got at least two wrong for sure. So here's to IFM in November I guess.

[Torene]

Originally Posted by ToBeAnActuaryOrNotToBe

I thought that this exam was way easier then the MFE March sitting where I made a 5. I spent most of my studying time on the new material and terms. Felt confident on around 26 problems and did not do any practice exams on ADAPT. Did around 90 quizzes total though. Each quiz had anywhere between 4 to 7 questions each with around a EL 4 to 5 difficulty. Finished the exam with an hour left and spent the hour trying to solve the 4 problems I wasn't sure on.

I also felt it was easier than the March sitting, although that could just be because I was more prepared. I was surprised I didn't get asked anything on the Actuarial-Specific Risk Management, at least not that I can recall. I also had more exotics than expected.

I only had 15 minutes left to do the 5 problems I wasn't sure of, but 4 of them were conceptual, not computational. I just wish I knew my score already!

[behindthebag]

Originally Posted by Torene

I also felt it was easier than the March sitting, although that could just be because I was more prepared. I was surprised I didn't get asked anything on the Actuarial-Specific Risk Management, at least not that I can recall. I also had more exotics than expected.

I only had 15 minutes left to do the 5 problems I wasn't sure of, but 4 of them were conceptual, not computational. I just wish I knew my score already!

Some exotics were mentioned in the Actuarial-Specific Risk Management study note which could be why they are being tested more often.

[ToBeAnActuaryOrNotToBe]

Originally Posted by Torene

I also felt it was easier than the March sitting, although that could just be because I was more prepared. I was surprised I didn't get asked anything on the Actuarial-Specific Risk Management, at least not that I can recall. I also had more exotics than expected.

I only had 15 minutes left to do the 5 problems I wasn't sure of, but 4 of them were conceptual, not computational. I just wish I knew my score already!

The Actuarial-Specific Risk Management shows up as only 1% on the CoachingActuaries study schedule.

The fact that there were more conceptual questions probably added to the fact that I felt it was easier. Those questions were based on me knowing the concept or not. It's not like I had to spend 5+ minutes doing calculations. I got to use that time saved doing the calculation intensive old MFE portions.

[ToBeAnActuaryOrNotToBe]

Since the exam window is officially over (last sitting was on Wednesday), did anyone else get a question with Brownian Motion? I know that Brownian Motion was supposed to be removed from MFE/IFM. It was an old topic before the 2017 change. I was surprised I got a question with that.

[tkt]

Originally Posted by ToBeAnActuaryOrNotToBe

Since the exam window is officially over (last sitting was on Wednesday), did anyone else get a question with Brownian Motion? I know that Brownian Motion was supposed to be removed from MFE/IFM. It was an old topic before the 2017 change. I was surprised I got a question with that.

Sounds like a defective question. I just reported to the SOA so that they can look into it.

[ToBeAnActuaryOrNotToBe]

Originally Posted by tkt

Sounds like a defective question. I just reported to the SOA so that they can look into it.

Might not have been defective. I just didn't know what Brownian Motion was in general. It said something like "the Brownian Motion of the logarithm..." then listed a value. It was one of the variables given, but it wasn't the whole point of the question.

[tkt]

Originally Posted by ToBeAnActuaryOrNotToBe

Might not have been defective. I just didn't know what Brownian Motion was in general. It said something like "the Brownian Motion of the logarithm..." then listed a value. It was one of the variables given, but it wasn't the whole point of the question.

Got it, but I think the wording should be updated to remove the reference to Brownian motion since it's NOT on the IFM syllabus. Previously in the older version of MFE, a volatility could be given as "the logarithm of the dollar per yen exchange rate is an arithmetic Brownian motion with daily volatility of X%...". That was ok because Brownian motion was on the MFE syllabus at that time.