Search results

Very good. Thanks for your opinion.

I have high respect for the actuary profession as I have a close friend who works as one. Do you see the FRM material as being the challenge or the exam to be the real challenge, or both. Are the SOA exams straight forward (comparatively speaking) like I think the CFA exams are? Meaning, well...

I have absolutely no feel for how I did, particularly when it's graded against your peers. But I will say that after the Nov. test I felt MISERABLE about how I did, fully expecting 3's and 4's, but I got really close to passing. Go figure. So, I'd keep your chin up. We are all in the dark...

I think that you are probably right about the fiduciary response. I probably read too much into it, but not remembering fully the question, I'm usually reluctant to choose the most obvious answer and looked for any excuse (such as a trustee provides services to both issuer and bondholder) to...

Ahhh, was that how the question was posed (CAPM)? I was trying to give Brian an answer, but didn't remember the question fully.

Actually, I wasn't sharp at all, I skipped over this question because I didn't fully understand it so I just defaulted in answering it by guessing .94 as it was the only parameter I remember using and I'd thought it was a given under Risk Metrics. However, the .97 I had to look up as this exam...

I only remember a question that described a mean and variance as being the only considerations...something to that effect, which informs us of how to look at the question given that we are supposed to consider a normal distribution to answer some other part of the question. But I really dont...

I thought that Lambda was a given, unchanging weight and as time increases the impact on variance will decrease. So this is "solving" for variance as EWMA does, not lambda parameters. That was my understanding. Do you remember having to solve for Lambda before in practice? Just the question...

While I skipped this question, I mean to say that I didn't think too hard on it, but I remember that I answered .94. But here's why and also here's the question. I picked .94 just because I thought that it was a given decaying weight (Risk Metrics copyright blah blah blah)...ya know, the one we...

That was a question that I just skipped and never got back to. I hadn't prepared to answer that kind of EWMA question as I'd never seen it as a practice question. I suppose I'm glad I saved the time by avoiding it.

This forum is dedicated to discussing the exam and the questions as we remember them. Never heard we can do that. In fact if this were the case, I think BT would have a problem.

Wow! last thing you needed are some distractions to go with your first attempt at the FRM!! Thats a legit complaint if I've ever heard one. Air conditioning came on in my test room and I got upset!

I don't remember if we were comparing variances or volatilities, just remember that my comparison figure was .00053 vs. .00055 (something like that). Do those figures ring a bell? If not, I may have missed something.

Adelaide, I got the EL and got a selected answer just using EL=PD*AE*LGD but don't remember the number now but, UL I remember something like 118 or 180...anyway 1's and 8's. UL=AE * sqrt (variance of LGD*PD + LGD^2 * PD * (1-PD) ) However, the PD *(1-PD) was replaced with EDF^2 that was...

I calculated omega/gamma weight as being lower than the stated variance and selected the graph that started lower and reverted higher. :0 I can't be sure, but I think I calc. something like 0.000053 something to 0.000055 something. But I didn't calc. an updated variance based on returns and...

I know this is a Series 7 question that GARP turned into a nightly news story.

I did the conversion, just to have the rates straight. It was just a precaution and a quick 1/x calculator button push.

I do remember stopping to think about the question but blew by it when I saw the other answers, and just dismissed them as being redundant. Maybe too hastily.

Well, then maybe I got it wrong but then it doesn't make sense to me. For that matter financial ratios and monitoring the balance sheet are really one in the same because you cant do one and not the other. Great example though of how tricky a really, seemingly, concrete idea in my own head...

Agreed. Preparing Financials would be the responsibilities of Corporate officers, monitoring Financials would be done by analysts and potential bond holders due diligence, but trustees have fiduciary responsibility to the issuer to keep them in compliance with the indenture. Good example of...