Is Hull sufficient?

[gm.mathur]

Hi David,

Is it true that if you read and know Hull, you have covered 40-60% of FRM exam? Rest gets covered in other core readings/books/BT videos etc

Basically, I am asking if we should pay lot of emphasis on Hull since its language id easy to understand and if we do the questions at the end of the chapter, concepts are cleared

thanks for your inputs

GM

 

[David Harper CFA FRM]

Hi GM,

No, i would say Hull is necessary but insufficient, and that % seems to overstate Hull. I don't know if you refer to the L1 or the full exam? But either way, I think that % exaggerates Hull relative to the whole. I think you can argue Hull is the single text with the most coverage (and therefore I do agree a lot of emphasis can be placed in Hull), along with Jorion. Also, he is a necessary precursor to certain L2 topics.

Now that I've blogged out almost all of the sample L1 (answers here @ http://forum.bionicturtle.com/viewforum/33/), I was surprised at how much of the sample L1 exam (disproportionately) referenced Hull. So, there is no doubt he is critcal to Level I. But I would put that % at somewhere nearer to one-third (25% to 35%) for the Level 1; also key are Gujarati, Tuckman, and Jorion. So, I disagree just b/c it gives to little weight to the others...David

 

[gm.mathur]

Thanks a ton David...this clarifies.

Regards,
GM