Got it about a month ago. I think delivery has sometimes been an issue in the past - you may check the Nov 2018 FRM 2 Feedback thread to see how other folks resolved issues.
I probably spent less on part II than part I, but it's not something that I tracked. If I had to guess, I'd say 80-100. Many of the topics - particularly in market risk and operational risk - were highly familiar to me. The work experience absolutely cut down on required study time for both...
Certified this morning, email at 9:40am EST. Submitted on 6/28, not particularly early... maybe 11:00am EST. My experience was a pretty clear cut case, however, which may have helped. Thirteen years as a financial institution regulator specializing in market risk, liquidity risk, and capital...
I'd call the ability to bypass logical security measures and access hidden data by simply changing the date on your phone a pretty weak cybersecurity measure. Admittedly not a ton of risk in this particular case, but it wouldn't make me feel good about, for example, keeping a credit card number...
I see your point. I've been thinking about this question for a while post-test, and I think you may be right - could be a case where either Poisson or Binomial will get you there (more or less) as long as you set up the problem correctly. I remember that using Poisson I didn't get an exact...
Actually, I think that you can assume that lambda = 60*.05. Each one-day VaR is, by definition and convention, an independent event. So every day (independent event with potential outcomes [break, no break]), there is a 5% chance of the 1-day VaR being exceeded. If you were to take a 100 day...
I'd estimate maybe 100 hours. Could be more, but nowhere near your 250-300. To be fair, I have a career background (10+ years) in financial risk management, including ERM, VaR concepts, MBS and structured products, etc.
I recall the most logical answer being something along the lines of the credit spread could change without a change in the underlying (Treasury, LIBOR, etc) rate.
My memory isn't completely clear on the question at hand, but there was one apparently straightforward duration/convexity price change question that gave you both D and C. However, the C that was given was negative. I have no doubt that they would have had a dummy answer there to catch anyone...
There is no defined threshold, and nobody but GARP knows the exact methodology. David has discussed this a number of times on different threads in the forum. It seems that in some way, GARP scales off of some view of the 5th quantile of test takers. So something about the top 5% of test...
I only vaguely recall the first question you're referencing. I thought it asked about the difference/increase in EL, in which case you'd clearly have had to calculate EL for both loan values and compare.
The second I recall more distinctly, and I believe it was the variance that you were asked...
That's correct - as long as you converted the portfolio variance to standard deviation for the Sharpe Ratio calculation. Wouldn't be surprised if they had a dummy answer that skipped that step.
I don't remember the answer to the CPR/SMM question, but it was a straightforward conversion with an exact match answer. There was some extraneous information given in the question, so if you're positive you had the formula correct, you may have mistakenly used incorrect figures or incorporated...
I agree with you 100% that ESL candidates were likely disadvantaged by the nature of the questions. I'm not sure that makes it a bad or poorly written test, but I absolutely understand your frustration with it. I thought to myself several times during and after the test that being a native...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.