2차 결제하기(클릭)
위의 2차 결제하기 버튼을
클릭해주세요.
2차 결제 미진행시 배송료가
추가 결제될 수 있습니다.
시험/합격후기홈>국제자격증>FRM>시험/합격후기
| 제목 | 2008 FRM 준비과정 및 시험후기 | 등록일 | 2008-12-09 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Initially I have never thought about taking the FRM exam. I knew some friends of mine who took it last year, but in that time I wasn't really interested in at all, and actually I was kind of "against" these kinds of exams, because I have seen a lot of cases that of those people who practically were prepared for "nothing" rushed into those sort of exams before entering into the job market. Basically, I thought merely doing something for job preparation alone was not right, especially after acknowledging myself as an university student. However, my perception changed as I have observed some instances where some of my seniors that I have thought to be good persons, and did well in their school works actually prepared for CFA and FRM and obtained the certification. Even one of school professor told us in the class that CFA is really hard and challenging to get. I have soon got tuned in to those voices, and looked through the curriculums. The more I acquired information, the more I got convinced of myself, and finally I reached into a situation "This is it!". I had tried my best to align my course works with the curriculum. Corporate finance, derivatives, macroeconomics, to name but a few. However, I did confronted an obstacle, and the thing was, the courses were not easy! Especially derivatives course drove me berserk, because I was a complete novice in this area. I was not sure if I could be on track, and I really needed a good score.(I will not mention about my GPA in this moment.) I was anxious, panicked, and not know what to do, only until when I found that FRM course provided a good "tool" for derivatives. Both our school and the curriculum used the Hull's text, so it was fine for me. At first, I tried to use the course pack provided by the Epasskorea only as an "reference", but I simply could not do that for two solid reasons. First of all, the course pack provided was weigh to expensive to just use as a reference. Second, and much more importantly, as I peeked into the study guide more thoroughly it turned out to me as a "good investment". What do I mean by here? As I have stated earlier I never do things motivated solely by only containing practical reasons, i.e. seeking jobs, it has to be aligned with my overall career development, and anything against my perception does not pass the minimum required hurdle rate which I have pre-established. Since I only used my ex-ante variable(I am about to get sick of my own analogies, double-sorry for those who are reading.)for my projection, how do I know whether it was a "good investment" or not even for now? Well, the core thing is that, I never considered this as an "exam" at the first place. If this premise does not hold, I won't get to know the result of my investment until mid January. Instead, I thought this as a "program". If I perfectly follow the program(studying all the aims mentioned in the study guide, which means every now and then I should look up the texts in case when I think the Schweser notes and the course pack provided does not give me an sufficient answer to me.) I would get to obtain a lot of insights, implications and understanding of the financial markets. Although, I do not consider myself as going through all the materials perfectly, I tried at least, and I am quite satisfied with the overall result of the "program". I bought Tuckman's and Hull's book, because I thought those two formed the center for the further understanding of the materials. By the way, Mr. Kim recommended Meizzenr's book, but I have not yet read it. The strange thing was that, I did not buy or read the Jorion's book, because I thought it was another version of a Schweser notes. Although, I did not completely master the materials of the books I have just mentioned, when every time I was not sure for a particular subject, I have tried to look it up there, and I think that this gave me insights, which I could not get from the lectures or the notes. For Statistics, I have took a class that used Freedman's textbook, and I really did not study quants at first, because I knew most of the concepts that were covering the curriculum. The moment when I started to study VaR, although I was not completely understanding the concepts, I just went on, because I did not want my study schedule to be delayed, and I was participating in a group study, so I had to kept up with them. The thing I have learned when I went on more was, everything takes time. I remember when Mr.Kim said "지금 가르키는 것들이 양이 솔직히 너무 많아요. '숙성기간' 이 필요한 거죠." So my advice is that if you don't understand something, give it a try, but don't waste too much time on a subject. I am not saying just to let it go, but to revisit it later, then as a result, you will eventually get to understand it finally. After finishing market risk, I have entered into a totally new area, "Credit risk". I don't know if it was because of the lecturer or the subject itself, or simply because of regrets for my early screwing up for market risk, I really got entranced to this area overall. Especially, I even found myself having some fun with credit derivatives, although I did had a hard time understanding credit portfolio models. Once you get committed to a particular subject, raising more questions, it less likely to forget about that one. The very last one, operational risk was encountering me. By then, I was pretty confident about the rest of the risks(market and credit), and the only risk I had to conquer was oprisk, however it was weigh to conceptual, had a hard time reading it again and again to grab the ideas. The only advice I can give you is "repetition". I think nothing can work better than that diagnose. The last session of the course pack was the cram session, and I only discovered myself knowing nothing. At this point, I really thought "What have I learned since?" The questions were not easy, and even worsening the situation was the questions itself were not clear enough. But as Mr.Kim mentioned, “계산 문제는 손으로 익숙해져야 한다”. The problem was I was not really focusing on solving questions, and I felt discrepancies between theoretical approach and actually solving the problems. However, if you "have it" the question becomes yours. During the cram session Mr.Kim said "저 솔직히 ORM part는 기업윤리인줄 알았어요. 하나도 안 보고 갔어요...(중략)...그냥 '건전한 상식'으로 시험을 보러 갔죠.", and I thought this "sturdy commonsense" is hard to build in the short-term which sort of discouraged me in some sense, however unless you are not just absorbing and memorizing the materials, we were in some sense building this commonsense, and it turned out that what we have learned were indeed imbedded in the questions. There are some other things I wanted to mention, but in this moment I am not even sure what I am saying write now, I am about to get into sleep, but I did try to elaborate as much as I can. My last words, actually it is not mine, I want to end up writing with the following statements the instructors made, and I believe this to be true, and the core principle of succeeding in the FRM program. Dr .Lee: "여러분들이 머릿속에 남는 것은 공식이 아니라, 기본 logic이다. 맹목적으로 암기하려다 보면 실전에서 반드시 흔들린다." Mr. Kim: "절대 FRM시험은 silo approach하면 안 된다." The parts I violated the principles above, I struggled solving the questions, and the parts I adhered to the principles....I guess it was not that too hard after all. Thank you for reading and hope for your success. | |||
