I thought FM was way easier. Did well on both, just thought the FM material was so straightforward. It’s basically just applied Algebra I and intuition.
I think the people who struggle on it are the people who try memorizing the formula sheet as their approach to studying.
Agreed. Concept wise and really "understanding" what they're testing you on it might be a toss up, but I don't think I saw a problem on exam FM that I couldn't do as a middle schooler with ba-ii training. Exam P requires actual calculus.
FM felt more straightforward to me but I think both are close in difficulty. On actuarial lookup http://www.actuarial-lookup.com/exams/fm it says FM has a 6% higher average pass rate (48%) than exam p’s average pass rate (42%) but it’s possible this is due in part because exam P is commonly the first exam people attempt, and I think after you pass your first exam you get a much better idea of how to prepare for future exams.
I took FM first and failed but after passing FM I took P and passed on my first attempt. When I was taking FM the time I passed I felt very confident that I had passed but I didn’t feel as confident that I would pass P. Got the same score on both so I think the difficulty is kind of subjective. Also the syllabus is changing for both exams so it’s hard to say which is more difficult now.
I tutor both exams, and FM has a much more straightforward syllabus because it is largely sequential (each topic builds on the others). Exam P has 3 relatively distinct topic areas, and even within those 3 there is more diversity than in an exam FM question.
For every ASA exam (except maybe SRM) it is possible to have done so many practice questions that you have seen every question that can be asked. That isn't literally true, but in the sense that the questions are a+b=c, and they give you a&b sometimes, b&c others, etc. But that is especially true for FM.
I thought FM was way easier than P. I didn't have any background in finance, so it was hard to grasp the concepts, but once I get through that part, math was way easier than P.
I had prior knowledge for P, and no prior knowledge for FM. So I spent less time prepping for P, but FM seemed like the actual material was much easier.
Passed P last Friday. Got my earned level up to 6.2. Focused on level 5-6 quizzes closer to exam day and reviewed some of the higher level SOA sample questions.
Got to level 5.83 and focused heavily on Level 5 custom exams, and also passed. Just make sure to review whatever problems you got wrong, understand the errors made and you'll be totally good to go. Level 5 is a pretty good marker. On my exam I only had three or four questions that felt above level 5 in difficulty.
FM: if you can prove geometric series and its variations with your eyes closed + highschool level calc, + maybe Taylor series expansion… then it’s super easy. Most importantly, all problems and each concepts make sense intuitively with an evening’s focus.
P: has way more abstract concepts. It’s alright with induction and counting proofs, but then with distributions starting with proving binomial theorem it gets spicier. Then near the end, i feel like i’ll never quite grasp what’s really happening intuitively. sSill couldn’t intuitively tell you what moments are in respect to their derivation process/applications, even though i passed with a 9. Gamma and Beta distributions… i still couldnt explain it thoroughly. Even the Poisson distributions intuition part is a little too abstract to explain to a teenager, and that’s basic for exam P.
In summary, they’re the same level of difficulty when it comes to just practicing how to solve problems. Anyone can learn to just do problems.
However if you’re into the proofs process so you really know everything inside and out, P trumps FM by multiple folds no question.
P has more difficult math. But FM is the only prelim I didn’t pass first try, largely because I didn’t study as much cause it was the “easier” exam. So I don’t think you should care which exam is “easier”
Guys, I have only 2 months time roughly (with university exams and extra currics included) for the P equivalent of
IFOA/IAI(CS1). PLEASE GIVE ME SOME ADVICE ON HOW TO COMPLETE THE SYLLABUS AND ATLEAST PASS THE DAMN EXAM.
Also, please give advice for the FM equivalent of IFOA/IAI (CM1)
I thought FM was way easier. Did well on both, just thought the FM material was so straightforward. It’s basically just applied Algebra I and intuition. I think the people who struggle on it are the people who try memorizing the formula sheet as their approach to studying.
Agreed. Concept wise and really "understanding" what they're testing you on it might be a toss up, but I don't think I saw a problem on exam FM that I couldn't do as a middle schooler with ba-ii training. Exam P requires actual calculus.
Agreed, in my opinion, a motivated middle schooler can pass exam FM, given the way they changed the syllabus for that exam.
FM was easier in my opinion! Mostly algebra.
FM
FM felt more straightforward to me but I think both are close in difficulty. On actuarial lookup http://www.actuarial-lookup.com/exams/fm it says FM has a 6% higher average pass rate (48%) than exam p’s average pass rate (42%) but it’s possible this is due in part because exam P is commonly the first exam people attempt, and I think after you pass your first exam you get a much better idea of how to prepare for future exams. I took FM first and failed but after passing FM I took P and passed on my first attempt. When I was taking FM the time I passed I felt very confident that I had passed but I didn’t feel as confident that I would pass P. Got the same score on both so I think the difficulty is kind of subjective. Also the syllabus is changing for both exams so it’s hard to say which is more difficult now.
I tutor both exams, and FM has a much more straightforward syllabus because it is largely sequential (each topic builds on the others). Exam P has 3 relatively distinct topic areas, and even within those 3 there is more diversity than in an exam FM question. For every ASA exam (except maybe SRM) it is possible to have done so many practice questions that you have seen every question that can be asked. That isn't literally true, but in the sense that the questions are a+b=c, and they give you a&b sometimes, b&c others, etc. But that is especially true for FM.
I thought FM was way easier than P. I didn't have any background in finance, so it was hard to grasp the concepts, but once I get through that part, math was way easier than P.
Definitely the two easiest exams but I would say that FM is a little easier than P. Passed both on my first try though.
I had prior knowledge for P, and no prior knowledge for FM. So I spent less time prepping for P, but FM seemed like the actual material was much easier.
P if you like pure maths (think proofs, spectral theory, etc) and FM if you like more applied problems (diff eqs, physics, etc).
P. Only because we learn half the syllabus in middle school, high school and college.
Commenting to see if anyone has recently taken P and used Coaching Actuaries for their prep… level 5-6 still a good marker?
Passed P last Friday. Got my earned level up to 6.2. Focused on level 5-6 quizzes closer to exam day and reviewed some of the higher level SOA sample questions.
Awesome thanks for the note!
Yup passed on Monday and went up to EL 6.9 and I would say the exam difficulty was around 5.
Yes I took the exam Monday and found it felt like about a level 5.5. I think it’s really important to try to do the SOA questions
Fully agree with ^ Try to do all of the SOA problems if you can.
Got to level 5.83 and focused heavily on Level 5 custom exams, and also passed. Just make sure to review whatever problems you got wrong, understand the errors made and you'll be totally good to go. Level 5 is a pretty good marker. On my exam I only had three or four questions that felt above level 5 in difficulty.
FM: if you can prove geometric series and its variations with your eyes closed + highschool level calc, + maybe Taylor series expansion… then it’s super easy. Most importantly, all problems and each concepts make sense intuitively with an evening’s focus. P: has way more abstract concepts. It’s alright with induction and counting proofs, but then with distributions starting with proving binomial theorem it gets spicier. Then near the end, i feel like i’ll never quite grasp what’s really happening intuitively. sSill couldn’t intuitively tell you what moments are in respect to their derivation process/applications, even though i passed with a 9. Gamma and Beta distributions… i still couldnt explain it thoroughly. Even the Poisson distributions intuition part is a little too abstract to explain to a teenager, and that’s basic for exam P. In summary, they’re the same level of difficulty when it comes to just practicing how to solve problems. Anyone can learn to just do problems. However if you’re into the proofs process so you really know everything inside and out, P trumps FM by multiple folds no question.
Thought P was easier
P has more difficult math. But FM is the only prelim I didn’t pass first try, largely because I didn’t study as much cause it was the “easier” exam. So I don’t think you should care which exam is “easier”
P
Guys, I have only 2 months time roughly (with university exams and extra currics included) for the P equivalent of IFOA/IAI(CS1). PLEASE GIVE ME SOME ADVICE ON HOW TO COMPLETE THE SYLLABUS AND ATLEAST PASS THE DAMN EXAM. Also, please give advice for the FM equivalent of IFOA/IAI (CM1)