Hello everyone!I am considering whether it makes sense to do a CFA. In my home country (in Eastern Europe) the certificate may raise a few eyebrows, but it would likely not be considered a major factor in trying for the best jobs in the financial industry. My question is what is the sentiment and opinion towards CFA in bigger Western European and U.S financial firms? In general? Anything is welcome. I have a well-paying job as an asset manager here, but I am weighing whether a CFA would open doors a few inches more when applying for jobs in U.S or Western Europe (in asset management). For background, I also have a MSc Econ from a Northern-European business school. Would a CFA be a practial asset for me?I am sorry if the topic has been discussed many times here, but I could not find a thread browsing through the forums. Thanks & br to this great site,drez

in my opinion it would depend on where the company was investing funds. From my knowledge of the CFA it is based on american rules regs, taxes etc. If you will be evaluating securities in that environment then the CFA should give you additional credibility. If you are analysing securities outside the US i would think it would be less help.

CFA is a good credential, but has a half-life like a radioactive isotope. Good to have when you are young and have little experience, but latter when you are forty and have been a fund manager for years no one cares anymore (if you have a good track record).Many buy-side jobs in the USA specify the CFA credential as a screening criteria for consideration.It also provides what I call the "shut-up" factor. Just like no one questions whether a CPA understands Cost Accounting methods under FASBi, with a CFA no one will question if you know portfolio therory if you have the credential (It is like saying, I am a CFA...so shut up...and get on with it).Plenty of other threads mention CFA, ...use search function.

In my opinion, CFA does help in establishing whether or not you understand economics behind financial transactions and instruments, and if you have the basic understanding of statistical/mathematical tools necessary to apply the financial theory. True - the more experience you earn in the field, the lesser the value of CFA charter. What really matters is what you learn on the job. One of my professors always said - Your real school will begin on the job. No surprise then that many a traders on the Wall St. have diverse educational backgrounds - ranging from history majors to masters of operas.

Hi James, I have read a few of your comments both on CFA and FRM etc........in other threads, and this one. If someone wants to do anything other than derivatives modeling in high finance ( basically other than pure quant stuff), a CFA+MSF +(FRMor PRIMA ( whatever)) is a great combination. Tell me if I am wrong !!!! One more question which has been asked by "n" no. of people in "n" threads, which is a better option FRM or PRIMA. I plan to appear for one of them in 2003, which should it be ??? A tough question. ThanksBest wishes

Wienner process:I am afraid in this decision you may have to live up to your screen name for an optimal solution."which is a better option FRM or PRIMA."Both of these options currently are so far out of the money that their payoff tables are identical. So pick the cheapest one to get the best NPV.I took the FRM test two years ago now, and was grandfathered for the PRMIA credential. I <glanced> at both test-content materials for this past round, and only noticed two things:few typos, both professionally edited, and in the case of FRM pre-test material a vast improvement from previous years.Both looked a bit harder than the test I took.You may have read my other posts describing that my own Pop was one of the first CFAs. He looks at current test study material every now and then and always says the same thing: "Boy, I could not pass that thing now."Thinking this through, this is as it should be in the Ponzi-scheme that professional credentials are. You want the payoff from being a pioneer by having the people that come after you work harder to raise the value of your credential.Aaron has looked at this more closely and critically elsewhere on this forum. Aaron is many exponential magnitudes smarter than me. Seek his advice and do what he says. Hope that helps, bon chance. - James, FRM, PCRM

Thanks James, I can slowly see my problem changing from a heteroscedastic mess to a stationary series.) I think I have interacted with Aaron only once, but I value your judgement. And I think your "NPV" idea makes business sense. Thanks again Best wishes

Hmm. Would either PRMIA/FRM or CFA make sense for the software development side? For example, I develop risk systems and by now have some reasonable feel for QF and finance in general. Would risk certification or CFA help me along my way or would everyone think that I am a pretencious a*****e if I add more letters after my phd?

One thing I can say with certainty is that the number of people giving this exam has VASTLY increased. Securities Regulatory bodies in various markets have adopted various levels of the CFA as part of the "eductional" requirements for being registered - in Canada the CFA serves as a prerequisite to being registered with the IDA (and the provincial regulatory bodies) as a portfolio manager/Assistant PM. Level 1 is also recognized in the UK for some type of registration or other which leads me to believe that the CFA charter itself will be quite valuable there as well. That leaves out Paris (which perhaps James can comment on) and Tokyo ............anyone here from Japan ?BTW, James, I like the "shut-up" factor argument

How about if one is currently in an MBA program? Is the CFA worthwhile? I've been told an MBA from a top school duplicates any knowledge one is expected to learn in the CFA program. Any opinions?Thanks...

Hi , I think a certification like the standards of CPA and the CFA are definitely a sign of quality. Getting thru the CPA exam is no joke. I have seen a few Phds with CPA and/ or CFA and it does have a lot of weight ( Frank Fabozzi must be a familiar name to most). After all we got to accept the fact that a Phd/MBA/MS from any of the best schools still do not hold the right to sign the balance sheet of a company in the year end ( a CPA cert./CA is mandatory, in most parts of the world). Basically each qualification has its on core competence. Best wishes.

PettenorWienner said it best "Basically each qualification has its own core competence."An MBA has courses that I consider "fluff." Like "Corporate Strategy" "HR" "Consulting Projects" "Career Management" and "Psychology of Marketing." To *me* those are joke classes and any useful material could be condensed onto one page and read in the bathroom. Other very smart and very successful people place great store in these classes, some place so much store in these topics that they have become professors of these areas of inquiry.They in turn think my classes play around with useless mumbo-jumbo equations and obscurantism..."let us consider a complete, frictionless, market of two assets, now let us consider investors with differing utility curves of risk appetite, however, no investor is a 'risk lover' that pays to take a negative expected return...." They think I am from Mars, planet of the stupid mathematicians.Soooooo.....An MBA is a fine credential if you want to be in the soft side of sales on Wall Street. If you want to be an Analyst, then a CFA further hones your skill set. If you want to be in Corporate Finance or Auditing, then a CPA hones your skill set. If you want to be in Risk Management, the the FRM and PRM hone your skill set.The MBA is a generalist degree, even when you take an empahsis such as finance or marketing. A CFA further specializes you in financial analysis, like an MSF. I would argue that the CFA is more equivalent to a general finance MSF, without the hard-core econometrics and interest rate modeling that most MSFs must complete as part of the program.A CLU (Certified Life Underwriter) is a charter for life and annuity actuaries. CFP is for certified financial planners. The actuarial profession has loads of letters: SOA, CAS, etc. for difering levels of skill and specialization.I do *not* think an MBA from a top school duplicates material in the CFA. A glance at the courses in an MBA and the books and content of the CFA should confirm this. Sure, there is overlap, but no MBA program goes into the depth the CFA does, just like no Finance MBA goes into the depth of an MSF.I think there is a persistant myth that if you get an MBA from a top school you have mastered all fields of inquiry in how finance *really* works and no one need tell you anything additional and you need not learn anymore. This myth is as false as the myth that folk with these credentials never go to jail. A quick review of last year's headlines dismisses the latter myth. The former myth endures as each new class of eager newly-minted MBAs hits the market.But then, I am biased. Listen to other opinions.Gotta go. Sorting the CVs I got in this morning's mail into Penn, Stanford, Harvard, and Columbia piles. Oooops, here is one from Tuck. James, MSF, FRM, PRM (taking the CFA exams 'cause my firm wants me to....bored).

MBAs and masters degrees in general, are academic qualifications.CFA, CPA, ACCA, FRM, etc, are proffesional qualifications.Each one fo them, serves different clienteles and objectives. Their only interaction is that having already one may make it easier to get the other.