ST choices

[tatos]

I currently work in short term, mainly focused on motor insurance. And that's pretty much the only actuarial experience I have. However, I'm fairly certain this is not what I want to be doing in the future. I didn't nearly like CT6 as much as CT5 for instance and I don't seem to enjoy too much of the work I currently have to do.

So, while it may appear logical for me to do ST7 and ST8 (General Insurance pricing and reserving), I really don't want to.

Would it be a serious mistake for me to attempt ST2 and maybe ST5 as well as ST1 or ST9 perhaps? I mean, given that my exposure in short term is mostly limited to motor insurance could it not be said that I'm not really losing out on that much relevant experience to help with understanding an ST (7 or 8).

Are the chances of passing SA2 even less then?

I've gotten the impression that this might be a big mistake, but at the same token I don't want to carry on working in an area that I don't enjoy? Please help! Thanks

 

[mattt78]

I did ST7, ST8, and SA3. I found the exams are only quite loosely (or not at all for SA3) based on the reading material, so it would be pretty difficult to pass without being able to draw on background knowledge/understanding and experience.

Maybe you should take a look through some recent papers for each course before you make a decision.

 

[bystander]

You aren't obliged to do both general papers so you could do one + one other.

So if you are interested im pricing, do that one or if you like reserving, do the other.

Then choose a different ST outside your field too and, if you are sure you don't want to do general as Fellowship - sounds like you are hence my suggestion of just 1 general ST, think which one you do want to specialise in.

That way keeps most avenues open to you as most people will do 2 subjects that are very similar ehg ST1 and 2.

But assuming no-one is paying for you and you would be comfortable justifying your choices at an interview (assuming you are thinking of moving on) then choose something of interest/use to you longer term.

 

[Bodhisattva]

I currently work in short term, mainly focused on motor insurance. And that's pretty much the only actuarial experience I have. However, I'm fairly certain this is not what I want to be doing in the future. I didn't nearly like CT6 as much as CT5 for instance and I don't seem to enjoy too much of the work I currently have to do.

To my way of thinking, not liking the area you work in is much more of a problem than which STs you choose. It sounds like you'd be much happier working in, say, life or pensions than GI.

Is it possible for you to work in a different (actuarial) area with your current employer? Failing that, could you change employers to get exposure to another area? It sounds like you've been thinking about that anyway, and the earlier you do it, before you get too specialised, the easier it'll be.

So, while it may appear logical for me to do ST7 and ST8 (General Insurance pricing and reserving), I really don't want to.

Would it be a serious mistake for me to attempt ST2 and maybe ST5 as well as ST1 or ST9 perhaps? I mean, given that my exposure in short term is mostly limited to motor insurance could it not be said that I'm not really losing out on that much relevant experience to help with understanding an ST (7 or 8).

In terms of playing the exams 'game', you might find ST7 or 8 easier as you've worked in GI (I'm a GI specialist, and that definitely helped me with both ST7 and 8). On the other hand, if you don't like the work, you'll be less motivated if you studied these subjects than if you studied something that you're interested in.

From a career perspective, if you can change roles before you sit your STs, you'll find sitting the ST appropriate to your area easier than if you sat it without changing roles. And if you can't, doing an ST in an area in which you don't currently work would at least show a potential employer that you're serious about changing areas.

ST9 could be useful if you plan on doing capital modelling work.

Are the chances of passing SA2 even less then?

Passing an SA is hard enough in your area of specialism, let alone in an area in which you haven't worked! This is one reason why I think you'd be better changing your role before you at least get to the SA stage.

I've gotten the impression that this might be a big mistake, but at the same token I don't want to carry on working in an area that I don't enjoy? Please help! Thanks

The exams are going to last (hopefully) only a few years. Your area of specialism is (probably) going to last your whole career. Get that right, and your options will come into focus.

Good luck!

 

[manish.rex]

Regarding ST Choices

Hi all,

I need advice from you people regarding the choice of STs I will be taking in near future.

I have just completed CT series, and will be taking at least one st along with CA1 in my next attempt. The problem I face is my rather different work based experience . I have worked in retail banking for last 6 years, mostly in credit scoring, risk analytics and modeling. I have fair exposure to finance and investments as well.

I find interest in risk management, and through my work based experience, a role in banking risk management seems a fair shot in the medium to long run.

Hence , while ST 6 seems a good choice , however, what other ST I should go for is something I am not very clear about. I know that ST9 could be a good choice as well. Do I need to take ST 5 if I am writing ST 6, or it can be any of the remaining STs (I guess we need to clear 2 STs)? These I have to decide keeping in mind the later SA series I will be writing , which may require experience based knowledge as well.

Thanks