What's new

Are the FRM Part 1 Exam Questions restricted to LOS?

nc27

Member
Subscriber
Hi,

Are the FRM Part 1 Exam Questions strictly restricted to Learning Objectives?

CFAI is very particular with respect to asking questions which are addressed only by LOS.

Is it the same with GARP?

@Nicole Seaman @David Harper CFA FRM
Based on my experience from the may 2021 part 1 exam, I can confirm that GARP questions were addressed with respect to the LOs... problem is that (at least for part 1) there are 1500 LOs for a total of 100 tested questions on exam day, so GARP can (and in the may exam they did it) ask anything from the most evident LOs (i.e. minimum variance hedge) to more obscure LOs (i.e. kandall thau correlation coefficient)... and they also are more focused on the qualitative aspect (deep understanding) of the LOs than just a bunch of quantitative questions ... at the end of the day they want to be reasonably sure that you had put a sufficient amount of time to understand conceptually the content. For people that claimed that the exam was not quantitative enough, do not forget that the practice that you put in (answering BT questions for example) just reinforced this qualitative understanding.
 
Last edited:

sgrgpt

New Member
Based on my experience from the may 2021 part 1 exam, I can confirm that GARP questions were addressed with respect to the LOs... problem is that (at least for part 1) there are 1500 LOs for a total of 100 tested questions on exam day, so GARP can (and in the may exam they did it) ask anything from the most evident LOS (i.e. minimum variance hedge) to more obscure LOs (i.e. kandall thau correlation coefficient)... and they also are more focused on the qualitative aspect (deep understanding) of the LOs than just a bunch of quantitative questions ... at the end of the day they want to be reasonably sure that you had put a sufficient amount of time to understand conceptually the content (for people who claimed that the exam was not quantitative enough, do not forget that practice that you put in by answering BT questions just reinforced this qualitative understanding)
Thanks @nc27

Also, I came across this in the Candidate Guide.
1624512818635.png


@Nicole Seaman @David Harper CFA FRM Would love to hear your opinion as to whether GARP adheres to Learning Objectives or are there any ambiguities because like @nc27 said I've seen claims by people who have taken the Part 1 exam that exam questions were not as expected.
 
Last edited:

David Harper CFA FRM

David Harper CFA FRM
Staff member
Subscriber
Hi @sgrgpt It's a good question. The observations to which you refer (i.e., "claims by people who have taken the Part 1 exam that exam questions were not as expected") are a common feature of the FRM, and arguably, related to the problem cited very accurately by @nc27 namely ...
problem is that (at least for part 1) there are 1500 LOs for a total of 100 tested questions on exam day, so GARP can (and in the may exam they did it) ask anything from the most evident LOS (i.e. minimum variance hedge) to more obscure LOs (i.e. kandall thau correlation coefficient).
... many of those 1500 LOs are expansive or quite permissive in their interpretation (don't get me wrong, many are quite exact, in particular the calculations). When GARP says that "Every FRM Exam question maps to at least one learning objective," this is a subtle point, but this basically pre-qualifies almost any risk-related question. Give me a risk question, and I can map it to some combination of fragments of different LOs. Further, relative to this universe, GARP has published a very narrow cumulative set of Practice Questions (because each year's are not fresh, but rather the majority of their PQs over the last, say, 5 or 8 years, in fact are recycled questions or merely corrections; some of those Practice Exam questions have been revised for imprecisions/errors twice or three times). This creates what i have called a "lack of prospective clarity:" it is very hard to deduce what candidates can expect! Logically, you can expect anything within the entire fog of risk. When the questions tilt qualitative, this massive map of LOs is effectively a blanket that spans a large territory, arguably too much. That's why I have constantly written that the FRM exam is "over-assigned" by which I mean "too many LOs." This over-assignment varies; e.g., P2.T6. Gregory's Counterparty risk has many LOs with a remote chance of being tested. Another factor particular to P1: GARP's new readings are often shallow (i.e., insufficient to the LO nuances) relative to previous author(s), with fewer illustrated examples, and the EOC PQs are not exam-level questions (!). Let's get real, this is mostly for the convenience of GARP. The approach basically allows them to ask any set of exam questions and it's defensible according to the approach of (i) massive terrain of 1500+ LOs, (ii) permissively flexible "to-multiple-LO" mapping, (iii) broad interpretation of LOs, (iv) in P1's case, lack of EOC PQs that are representative, and (v) a narrow database of actual Practice Questions. An optimistic view of all of this is something like, "risk is dynamic, the exam updates every year, cutting edge!!" ;) I hope that's helpful,
 
Last edited:

Eustice_Langham

Active Member
Essentially, yes there are too many LO's and some people have claimed that this means that the course is losing its effectiveness. Perhaps reduce the number fo LO's, make it a three part course by involving SCR instead of having so many LO's that will not be tested in the exam even the favourites.
 

David Harper CFA FRM

David Harper CFA FRM
Staff member
Subscriber
@Eustice_Langham please don't suggest to GARP that they make it a 3-part course; GARP would love the additional revenue. It's just the worst possible suggestion. You want more topics to cover? Howabout updating current topics ... about reducing the LOs, yes, I've only been saying that for 10 or 13 years
 

Eustice_Langham

Active Member
Hahaha....far be it from me to disagree with yourself, but something needs to be done. I dont want more topics to cover, but a complete review of all LO's would be a good start, at least to me.
 
Top