I think you did. Realistically, you must have done really well overall. [and I had expected that you’d pass it in July to begin with] Usually there’s more than 2 people discussing an exam. I wonder a little what the average reaction to this exam is/was. I’m fairly confident that FVA was tough, or at least not easier than normal but I’m unsure about FVC.
Yeah, it stinks that they killed AO and we can’t have the broader discussion with everyone there. Was always helpful post exam.
Maybe the transition candidates will start talking after DPA. But there should be a lot of non transition candidates taking FV at this point.
Yeah I walked out in July with a “really hope I have a generous grader” so I wasn’t surprised to end with a 5/5. Reviewing my performance, I had 1-2 questions on each that was sub 20%. The other ones were generally high enough. I feel very confident improved on that performance. Hopefully we both will be in the Specialty study thread come January
Ugh, I was on the side of confident in July. I need to get this pass so I can put it behind me conclusively. The percentiles were hilariously unhelpful. I think (aside from the possible negative having less math points on FVC) having excel was awesome for me cause I was able to get the same math points I would have gotten anyway on paper but I was able to do it way way faster so I could afford to spend more time on the words questions than usual.
I thought I did well on fva until I got on here… I may have completely missed question 7… like don’t even think I saw the question
How so? We haven’t discussed many FVA questions, mostly FVC, probably because it was fresher in our brains. If you thought you did well you may have done well on the rest of it.
I haven’t said it but FVA #1 isn’t going to be one of my strongest. But there’s not much to discuss cause it’s lists. Not very exciting.
#7 was 5 points, and first part of question was a 2 point part asking about goals of due diligence. Then there was a 3 point part where you had to also refer to case study. Are you sure you skipped it? That’s unfortunate, especially if you were well prepared for due diligence and ready to apply it to case study.
I think I will be retaking this exam in the spring 
Q7 on FVA was a surprise. I didn’t scroll the entire way down so I was planning on it only being 6 questions like the Spring sitting.
It was a word answer only so it could be missed if you hadn’t looked closely enough
Unknowingly skipping an entire question is pretty much a nightmare scenario.
Did anyone get the NPBBC calculation question? I had no idea how to get around that one, came home, looked at the study material, still had no idea.
I believe I did it, I’ve already talked about it a bunch earlier in this same thread.
To sum up, the key to doing this problem the way I did is to focus on the following givens in the problem setup:
- APBO is correct
- there are no amortizations
Alemana and I had a longer discussion up above. We disagreed on how (if at all) to reflect any change in the SC in developing the max impact.
I kinda wonder if they meant to say EPBO is correct instead of APBO. That would change things. But it was definitely APBO.
What does give me pause is that this is a 5 point math problem and my solution is so easy.
I am open to other solutions.
We are given:
annuity error of .7%
discount error of 30 basis points (vs 5%)
ave years to full eligibility is 19, error of +/- 1
NPPBC is $X (I don’t remember, so let’s say $100,000)
APBO is correct
no amortizations
Please correct me if I’m misremembering something.
Perhaps it is possible that the error in APBO due to annuity error cancelled out the error due to eligibility years. Was this key to anyone’s solution? This is not great for me. I liked it better before I thought of this.
Total expense was ~1.3M
The annuity error was the piece that I couldn’t wrangle. It’s used to calculate the EPBO. We know the APBO is the past service/total service of the EPBO. But they told us the APBO was unchanged so I couldn’t square the annuity error, the service change and the unchanged APBO.
This is the line in my outline that I think matters:
Attribute EPBO on pro-rata basis over Past Service and Future Service
- Attribution Service
- Past Service = time from Date of Hire to Valuation Date
- Future Service = time from Valuation Date to Full Eligibility Date
- Attribution Service = Past Service + Future Service
- APBO = EPBO x Past Service / Attribution Period
- Remainder of EPBO is deemed to be earned over Future Service
- Service Cost = EPBO / Attribution Period
We know APBO is unchanged but EPBO may have changed and past service/attribution period may have changed.
Maybe you were supposed to take the unchanged APBO and back into the correct EPBO based on the annuity error and the adjusted service amount. And then use the corrected EPBO to estimate the correct SC.
Yes this is pretty much what I’m thinking (now).
question- given that you remember the NPPBC in problem setup as being ~1.3 million, are you standing by that you calculated a max error of about 700k? (as you posted earlier) or was that a typo
Nope, I don’t feel good about the number at all. I probably overestimated how much potential SC impact there could be due to the service change