This is the first time I am here and it seems that it might take quite some effort for me to get used to everything. Meanwhile, may I ask a couple of questions? Since I recently passed CFA tests, I'd like to use CFA for analogy purpose. Please do not mind.
I passed CFA predominantly using Schweser notes and by following the online discussions in theanalystforum.com. I am wondering whether there are any counter part of them for FRM? i.e., what is the best study note for FRM besides the official books (if any) from GARP? also what is the best places to ask questions and/or read about questions concerning FRM?
theanalystforum.com also has an FRM section, but it looks to me that it is not very well developed. I googled and find bionicturtle.com. I guess this might be the place for FRM, but I am not sure what is the meaning of bionicturtle and its relation to FRM. Sounds a bit funny, at least at the very beginning.
Any comments will be greatly appreciated!
I am biased but i'll give you my views anyway:
* In terms of study notes, that is not our (my) focus product: for textual study notes, Schweser provides them, just like they do for CFA. And when people write us with pre-sales questions, and their criteria is only or primarily study notes, we sincerely refer them to Schweser.
* The BT focus (what I hope is our strength) is based on my belief that most study notes are essentially versions of the source material and therefore marginally better than the source, and helpful more or less depending on your learning style (some are good at reading notes and memorizing, but *many* peope retain very little after reading notes. A fair segment of my customers are folks who only used study notes for the exam previously and want to try our way for the 2nd attempt). So, my focus is (i) video tutorials that have PPT printouts which essentially serve as notes/flashcards, (ii) dynamic learning XLS (the most concrete understanding is really only possible in the models) and (iii) I do think we have a reputation for writing the toughest questions (you'll note that's been mentioned on the AF board). I work very hard to give customers tough *and* precise questions; much of our positive f/back after exam day is along the lines of "thank you for giving me tough questions." (also, my own strategic focus is visual learning and hands-on, tool-based learning)
* This forum is a also a focus, and part of my committment to engaged help . I think it's safe to assert that we are the most active FRM board (currently)
Thanks a lot for the clarification. A key question for me to decide whether to buy a Schweser study note or not is actually heavily influenced by the thickness-of-books comparison. Since level III CFA official books probably exceeds 1500 pages in total, I found the Schweser notes very helpful, even though they are mostly a rephrase of the official books. At least somebody took the effort to screen out arcane details that won't show up in the actual exams and this effort does worth whatever it cost me.
Naturally, my question would be: how many pages do the official GARP books have and how many pages do the Schweser notes have? Of course, it is not fair to assume that you have done the comparison and I know that there probably is not an answer for FRM II. Still, any facts and opinions will be very helpful.
Hi Monster (no offense!)
That's interesting, they must do a great job on the CFA notes b/c I own the CFA source cirriculum b/c I think the CFA institute books are among the finest you can find. But, I do see your point about the "filter" value.
. i don't know the page-to-pages comparison. But I do think there is a huge cirriculum difference between CFA and FRM. The CFA is quite mature compared to the FRM; the FRM is still very rough around the edges, even before the new L2 format.
So when you say, "somebody took the effort to screen out arcane details that won’t show up in the actual exams," this is difficult-to-impossible for the current FRM 2009 exam simply because GARP's approach gives very little predictability. FRM questions famously have an imperfect correlation to the AIM statements (a "looseness" they seemed to formalize this year in the AIM language); in large part, this is deliberate. I am quite familiar with the disciplined structure of the CFA. The FRM is not like that, which has pros/cons, it is very difficult to say which details should be omitted (?!).
but also, my focus is not "merely" the exam for the exam's sake. I have customers who aren't sitting for the exam and my quality standard is frankly higher than GARP's (i.e., my error rate is demonstrably lower) because I am looking beyond the exam and hoping to become a preeminent destination. I sincerely try to help customers get a durable introduction to risk and learn concepts beyond the exam (also, as an aspiring "trust hub," selling short-term product is not my only goal in life; I am seeking to earn visitors' trust). although this "focus on the fundamentals" has served us well in results (by any metric, we clearly have the highest pass % and satisfaction. Although my sample admittedly may be biased toward the more serious risk student) . I do think it also implies that we are not the best for everybody, depending on your goals/criteria.