Will be my first attempt. TIA any good for this?
What is everyone using?
Will be my first attempt. TIA any good for this?
Tia is not great for this. The CF/Rf combo is pretty good from what i hear.
I ended up getting TIA, since I use it for all my previous exams.So far no complains. It’s definitely better than reading the original Clark 1994…
I will probably get Cookbook after I have gone through all the material. I am a bit sad CC doesn’t have a manual for 7. I really liked it for 9.
For anyone that wrote it, which paper was the hardest in your opinion?
Mack 94, the MMC paper by Meyers,
The ERM paper is long, contradictory, and vague. When I took the exam in 2017 it was all high level questions. In 2018 when I passed it was a lot of math related questions not fully described in the paper. Since this is like 30%-40% of the syllabus it is annoying.
Hey man… how doe it feel to be finally done? Hopefully I can join your rank next year…
I just got through Mack 94, and I am on the Venter paper… I am going to say Venter’s paper for 7 is as confusing for me as his paper for 8… Though I have to say I enjoyed Mack 94 somewhat. I wonder if his method of building a CI on the unpaid reserve could be used as a basis to set up Risk Adjustments under IFRS 17.
Also, Thanks for the heads up on the ERM section.
The MSE calculatiom for mack 94 is ridiculously hard. Venter is confusing
Everything is pretty good. Good feeling to be done.
Hey, what else did you use with CC for exam 9?
Also let me know how you like tia. I may consider tia as well!
For exam 9 I used CC, TIA and Cookbook. I’ve used TIA basically for most of my exams and they are generally pretty good. They explain the course content well.
I think for 7 we have basically TIA and CF to choose from? I read through CF’s sample course material and I thought it was ok. In the end I just decided to stick with the material that had worked for me in the past. So far I am happy with TIA’s course 7. As Act 123 pointed out, Mack 94 has some convoluted calculations, and Alejandro goes through it step by step and makes it understandable.
The advantage of the CF/RF combo is you get the cookbook. So if your company only pays for one pack, you don’t have to pay out of your pocket.
Which papers would you say the videos do a really good job with vs just reading the manual/summary? I’m also using TIA and RF cookbook.
And which papers do you think reading the actual source is worth the time? I tried to read the actual Hurlimann paper tonight and found it to be a waste.
@act_123 do you have any advice on what worked for you, and what’s best to prioritize? I know you passed a difficult sitting. How do you even prepare for those Brehm math questions? I totally agree they are not covered well (if even at all)…
I’ve only gone over Clark and Venter… and I am just going to say for those 2 TIA is better. I had to start early because we have back to back year-end in Jan and April, so I can’t really study too much.
I think cookbook and practice problems did a pretty good job on Brehm. Tia was also decent on Brehm too.
The only question I got that I didn’t know how to do in 2018 was the reinsurance note question. It is described in the text but the math is not explained.
I think reading Brehm a few times helps. I wouldn’t save it until the end. Maybe read it little by little while studying other things.
Thanks for the thoughts. So do you recommend slogging through the actual source paper to get those calculation questions (like that reinsurance note problem) down? The cookbook is pretty limited on that section. The new study kit isn’t available yet so I can’t even get a copy now if I wanted to, but I am wondering if it’s worth slogging through that paper in detail (especially given how everyone has said it’s contradictory) or if I’m better off just pounding TIA’s section and flashcards?
Also, is anyone interested in forming a study group? I’m trying to start early since I’m going to be unable to study in Sept & Oct, and will start pushing much harder in November.
I think everyone is different, however worked for you in the past will probably still work? Personally I do judge a paper by its cover. If that paper does not have a modern/fancy textbook look to it, I’d usually just read TIA instead. But that’s just me.
I am not sure what a study group does, but I am cool with the idea as I have started. So what do you have in mind when you say study group?
Honestly, as I mourn the passing of the old AO, GoA is probably the best platform to ask exam/technical questions? I felt the New AO and Reddit isn’t the best format to ask questions. So I’ll probably stick to this and/or Reddit if I have a question.
I would suggest reading Brehm a few times. You don’t want to get stuck cramming that paper.
Going through Shapland right now… I am curious how much excel will change the type of questions asked on this exam in the future… For example, the magic hat trick to get standardized variance in Shapland might be impossible to do under exam situation on a pen and paper exam, but it’s doable with excel (provided you know the formula)…
Wow you guys already started?
I wonder if anyone who’s passed exam 7 under the CBT style can chime into what worked for them.
I heard that it was a much more difficult exam compared to previous years.
I am thinking of doing CF/RF seminar but they don’t offer it until December or something so maybe I should just start by reading the source texts.
The link below is an early prototype of a software tool that automatically creates exam 7 type questions using past exams as a template. It’s minimal in design and coverage for now, but the idea is to develop it with direct input from those taking this exam in the next several months. Any feedback is welcome.
+1 for creativity for F–Cactus…
Hey Cloud, sup, sorry I haven’t been checking the forum. I’ve started early due to conflict with my work schedule… Well, you should email CF/RF and ask if they could allow you to purchase it now. I think they probably would be pretty accommodating.