Pages

How Do They Determine A Passing Score on The CFA Exams?

Since the CFA June exams are now done, there's a lot of concern as to how CFAI determines a passing score. So, here's a breakdown for Levels 1 and 2:

In the past CFAI used a strictly numeric method of calculating the pass rate - they'd take 70% of the 95th percentile score. So, back in the day, the minimum passing score would be no greater than 70%, and would typically be even less.

Now, their scoring system has a significant subjective component to it. Here's how it works: CFA Institute brings a number of charterholders that they call "Standard Setters" to Charlotte sometime in June. These people then discuss what they think a "minimally qualified" candidate should know (for L1 and L2). CFAI is pretty opaque as to what this actually means, but my understanding is that they look at the exams and come up with "the score".

They refer to what's know as the "Angoff method". If they apply this method in its strictest sense, this would involve each standard setter examining each question and making a subjective determination as to what percentage of well-qualified candidates would answer correctly on the question. For each question, the standard-setters percentages are averaged to get a percentage for that question. The individual question-percentages are then summed to get the passing score (in terms of number of correct answers needed).

So theoretically, the minimum passing score could be above 70%. But according to the scuttlebut on analyst forum, the minimum has likely been below 70% in each year. So, my gut reaction is that a 70% would get it done, and even slightly less.

But that's just a guess on my part.

Note: If you want to receive updates, either sign up for email updates on the right sidebar, or add our RSS feed to your feed reader.

0 comments:

Post a Comment

  • Stiglitz the Keynesian... Web review of economics: Stigliz has an article, "Capitalist Fools", in the January issue of Vanity Fair. He argues that the new depression is the result of:Firing...
  • It's Never Enough Until Your He... Web review of economics: Aaron Swartz quotes a paper by Louis Pascal posing a thought experiment. I wonder if many find this argument emotionally unsatisfying. It...
  • Michele Boldrin Confused About Marx... Web review of economics: Michele Boldrin has written a paper in which supposedly Marxian themes are treated in a Dynamic Stochastic Equilibrium Model (DSGE). He...
  • Negative Price Wicksell Effect, Pos... Web review of economics: 1.0 IntroductionI have previously suggested a taxonomy of Wicksell effects. This post presents an example with:The cost-minimizing...
  • Designing A Keynesian Stimulus Plan... Web review of economics: Some version of this New York Times article contains the following passage:"A blueprint for such spending can be found in a study financed...
  • Robert Paul Wolff Blogging On Books... Web review of economics: Here Wolff provides an overview of Marx, agrees with Morishima that Marx was a great economist, and mentions books by the analytical...
  • Simple and Expanded Reproduction... Web review of economics: 1.0 IntroductionThis post presents a model in which a capitalist economy smoothly reproduces itself. The purpose of such a model is not to...
  • How Individuals Can Choose, Even Th... Web review of economics: 1.0 IntroductionI think of this post as posing a research question. S. Abu Turab Rizvi re-interprets the primitives of social choice theory...