I have sat SP2 already and am wondering whether to sit SP1 or SP5 next sitting. I've heard there is some crossover between SP1 and SP2, but is this to a significant extent? SP5 sounds interesting but I don't want to make passing my next SP harder than it needs to be...
Hi Viridian, I am exactly on the same situation with you, I need to decide between SP1 and SP5 too. For me, I've passed SP2 in the last sitting and just sat for SA2. What I heard from different people are: SP1 has a lot of overlaps with SP2, so it won't be difficult to learn SP1 if you already learnt SP2 SP5 has loads to memorise (not too sure about this), and passing rate is lower I work in a direct life insurance company who has medical riders (SP1 health insurance) on top of the usual SP2 (life insurance) products. Most of my colleagues took SP2 and SP1 because they believe its the easiest way to pass. I am inclined to taking SP5 too with a similar reason to yours. However, I am concerned that I won't learn a lot of new knowledge if I take SP1. Taking SP5 might give me a better chance switching to any investment roles, but I'm thinking I might have equal chance of getting into investments even without SP5. One thing worth looking at is SP6 (Financial Derivatives) too. I looked at one of the past paper, it looks less wordy and more formula / algebra which might be both easier and more interesting knowledge. However, there are only very few candidates sitting for it so it is hard to judge the difficulty.
Thanks Trevor - that's useful to know. I am leaning more towards SP1 than SP5 currently I think - I was also thinking of the aspect of being in a better position for any investment roles in the future, but like you I'm also doubtful on whether it'll really have much impact. As an aside, how did you find preparing for SA2 after sitting SP2? Did you find it noticeably harder or just more of the same?
Between SP1 and SP5, I think it'll take more effort to learn SP5 than SP1 because I already have the basics from SP2. But that wouldn't be a problem to me because I can always ask questions on the SP5 forum. What I am more concerned about is the question style in the exam. For me, I do better in those analytical questions, those that requires technical analysis (eg: what happens to the EV if interest rate drops). I struggle with questions that needs to think broadly, or creative thinking rather. Regarding SA2, the technical things from SP2 definitely carries forward to SA2, but I find it noticeably tougher because I can't relate them with practical scenarios (eg: actual life insurer balance sheet), this could be because I'm not doing core actuarial work.
Which are you more interested in: investment or health? Choose the one you're most interested in learning about. If you're not interested in either: is there another SP you would be interested in? If so, take that instead. If you're not interested in any of them then sure, just take SP1 which sounds like the least effort for you.
I passed ST2 on my first sitting, but have struggled with ST1/SP1 for a while now. I'm sitting SP5 tomorrow - it's much more relevant to my work (which helps greatly) - I do day to day some of the stuff that is covered there (perf attribution, yield calculations, risk adjusted returns, rebalancing strategies etc). Hopefully that will be of some assistance. There is a higher mathematical content than most other SPs (barring SP6). Make of that what you will. If you liked CT8/CM2 then that might nudge you in SP5's direction. The perceived wisdom of doing SP1 as it's so similar to SP2 didn't work in my case. But, as others have said, it depends on the individual and their personal circumstances. Speaking for myself, I'm kicking myself for not having switched sooner. Two years ago, I switched internally in work to the investments area and I should have switched exams then, but I fell afoul of the "sunk costs" fallacy which saw me grimly attempting and re-attempting an exam I only ever had theoretical knowledge on but had spent a fair bit of time studying and I didn't want to see it go to waste.
Hi Brian, I would like to know more of your experience, as you did both SP1 and SP5. I work in a life insurer, but I’m neither a pricing/reserving/investment actuary - my role is quite a niche one. So either way, I won’t get practical experience on the content, will be all theories for me. I think I can equally understand any new contents as long as I look around, or ask questions in forums. What I am concerned about is the exam difficulty. I heard that SP1 is a lot of brain storming, not so much of standard questions (as opposed to SP2). I looked at one of the SP6 past paper, it looks like it has lesser brain storming to do, its formula and calculation; which is a positive thing to me but the low pass rate deters me. Besides the relevance of SP5 and your practical work experience, what do you think about the exam question style of SP5? Is it a lot of “weird” questions that requires you to think really hard, or is it a lot of standard questions? My exam strength is on questions that requires technical analysis, questions that can be solved/explained by looking at formulas. For example I can explain balance sheet impact by looking at the Solvency II pillar 1 components, but I can’t think of how to improve asset levels. What turns me down the most is a simple “Explain” question that is worth 15 marks. I struggle to squeeze 30 points to say.
Good luck! I don't do anything as part of my day to day work related to investments, so I'm concerned this will put me at a disadvantage compared to other students. I don't do anything related directly to healthcare either... but I think the synergies between SP1/2 are nudging me towards SP1.
@Viridian That sounds like the better move for you. There is a lot of crossover - Risks (for the most part), reinsurance, assumptions, , reserving, investment, monitoring, modelling, business environment etc. The major differences are pricing, the products themselves (this is quite complex with lots of variants) and the state provision of care etc. I found the higher order questions on SP1 papers a bit tough - just not enough familiarity with the industry to help me out in a tough scrape (plus I might have taken longer on some of the other questions as well, compared to someone in the industry). That said, having sat my first SP5 paper today, the question style seems to be changing in response to the online environment. I found some questions on today's paper hard to figure out what was being examined, though that's likely down to me (I only started studying it in mid Jan and barely had time to cover the course once).
I was in a similar position to yourself and chose SP5. I definitely found SP5 far harder than I did SP2. I found SP2 flowed on quite logically from CP1 but I really is to spend a lot of time studying and researching SP5 to simply understand the core concepts of SP5 (before evening turning to papers etc) That being said I did learn a lot from it and despite the fact SP1 could’ve been easier I’m happy with the learnings I took from Sp5
That is great to hear. The reason I am considering SP5 is that, despite it is a harder route to qualify, but it is rewarding in terms of knowledge and career development. But of course, this comes at a high cost, probably higher risk of failing too as compared to taking the easy way out - SP1. But again, I heard opinions that SP1 has a lot of higher order questions which makes the exam harder despite easy materials. I think ultimately, we all want to qualify which means we have to pass the exam.
I've only done SP5 + SP6. SP6 was the most interesting to me and if you're mathematical it isn't too much of a challenge to pass first time. SP5 was a little more wordy but there was significant crossover with SP6 and SP5 I thought. Both are very interesting IMO. No idea about SP1 but I find investment side more interesting than the other options already.
Sorry for reviving this thread but Im in the opposite situation: doing sp5, and need to choose another sp series. Any recommendations??
I think it depends on your risk appetite in a way. You can either choose to learn what you are genuinely interested to learn, or just pick the one that is easiest for you to qualify. I can't really offer a good advice, but I'll share my experience: When I was making this decision, I was pretty indifferent between SP1 and SP5. But given all the life insurance background I had, both work and exam, I went for SP1 as there is more overlapping. The study process was a lot easier than studying for SP2 previously, but when it comes to past paper practice, I notice the problem of being overly comfortable with life insurances. I tend to recycle a lot of points from life to health insurance, but a lot of them are not too relevant. So I end up need reviewing all my notes anyway. In hindsight if I picked Sp5 instead, this will probably not happen because I am learning it with a fresh pair of eyes, although the learning process will take longer. You might want to consider this factor if you are looking at a similar subject.
SP6 is a good choice if you're mathematically minded and perhaps working in investments, SP1 or SP2 might be a better choice if working in a health / life company (actual experience really helps when doing the higher order questions). Bear in mind the exam timetable as well, for the last two sittings and it would seem for the next two at least, SP1, 5 and 7 are on the same day, so you won't be able to sit the exams at the same time. I personally find the clumping of exams like this baffling.
Always take the one that takes the least effort. If you are actually interested in other SP, once you are qualified then you can go and study and take those exams.
Hi friends, would you say that sp5 is more qualitative than quantitative? I’ve gone through several past year papers and I feel it’s not very math heavy (as compared to say cm1). Thoughts please friends?
yep. SP6 is what you’re after if you’re looking for the most quantitative SP. The rest have quantitative elements but are mainly qualitative.
Having studied, SP1, SP2 and SP5, SP5 is the by far the most quantitive of those three. As CapitalActuary has said, I believe SP6 is quite maths-heavy for an SP. I've no experience with the pension or general insurance exams. SPs are meant to be more business / risk focused, the working assumption being that you'll have had your maths skills tested in the CM/CS (CT in old money) exams.
