CFA or Actuary?

Hi there,

Someone suggested me to go in for CFA rather than an actuary. Advantages of CFA over actuary given were:

1) Requires less time to qualify.
2) Less challenging
3) More rewarding / better package
4) Less number of exams (only 3) , first 2 ( being only objective with no essay type questions)

Can anybody throw some light on this?

 

depends...what are you doing as a career.......actuarial exams are not worth it if you are working in the world of finance & investments ...CFA is better.

If you are insurance CFA offers no benefits and not really reognised ...unless someone can tell me different.

 

i think FIA/FFA >> CFA but then you have to commit social suicide to get FIA!

depends on what job you want to do.

 

You seem to have the impression that the CFA is an easier qualification to get; it probably is a bit easier, relative to FIA, but it's still a mighty challenge, and the pass rates are very low. But as others said, they're not really very comparable, and it really depends where you want to work.

 

3 year

I would prefer a PhD title.....

CFA is a lot easier than actuarial exams...

 

remember..

easy -- means -- more people can do it -- value goes down
difficult -- less people can do it (or uninterested) - value goes up

 

or there's a PhD in actuarial science as alternative to FIA

 

Why not do both?

In the States, there are quite a few ads which ask for Fellows with CFA or MBA.

 

But what would be the job description of such ppl?

 

cone head?

 

What does that mean????

 

surprised you haven't heard the phrase...

 

ahhahahah

i get it now.