IMC or CFA... or both?

I'm a science teacher with a BSc (Hons) and PGCE in the UK and have been trading just over 10 years now. I have a keen interest in the mechanics of the markets and how they move and work and have read many, many books on them.

I came across CFA and looked into it and was interested in the syllabus although I am aware of its complexity and that it can be "hard". Then I came across IMC which seems less complex and can be completed in two months if you put in the efforts.

I may be just doing this for my general interests and passion for this area (wish I was directed to this when I was younger). Now at 37 and stuck in a wage trap... is there any point? But I really want to read and gain something about the financial worlds since I have been trading so long and have self trained/learned and read good books on different trading techniques, methods and about the different sectors of the markets (options, swaps, Futures, FOREX etc).

Should I, shouldn't I? IMC or CFA...or Both?! Any point at this time of my life and career; any point changing careers now? What's it like out there? :?::help:

Any input most greatly appreciated

if something is easier its probably not as worth it imo.
Im a final year finance student(will be 25 in march)) and personally going for CFA.
Your current job is in teaching tho so I cant see how either will help your career as you are not in business/finance unless you plan to change soon.
37 is definitely not too late to change

take a look at the criteria for CFA qulaification. And it is very expensive if unsponsored. IMC I don't know much about-sorry.

As a jobseeker I see a lot of vacancy adverts and based on those I'd say given your science background, go for a Physics MSc, do your IMC and then give BPP/Kaplan/Recruiters a call and see what quals are in demand for the type of post you want. Do it, get to work on your apps then cross your fingers.

There's also prop if you're already making money. I dunno anything about those though but a lot of people on here do and there are already some threads on the subject.

Good luck, whatever you do.

The way I understand it, CFA is basically the creme de la creme of investment/financial analysis professional qualifications, hence the price tag and expected duration it'll take to complete.

There is nothing more useless than doing the IMC with the intention of also doing the CFA. Doing the IMC will perhaps give you a couple of exemptions for the early CFA stages (the regulation based modules), but you're far better off using that time to crack on with the CFA straight away.

However, if you don't have the time/money for the CFA, the IMC is certainly something that recruiters will look at in a positive light. All depends on what you want to do, really. If you want to go straight into trading, I'm not sure how useful any of the above qualifications will be. Prop houses tend to look for other qualities. If you want to go into analyst roles in the City, obviously the qualifications will be a massive help.

Thank you all for your swift replies.

Yoshi: I intend for a career change and not to use it in my current science teaching post. However, thanks for saying 37 is not too late to change; made me feel better.

Gooseman: cost is not an issue... but is it true I need to be in the job field to do CFA?

scose-no-doubt: I'm still in my job but thinking of change to my passion in the Markets and get more involved instead of doing this at home early in the morning or last thing at night (and come awayfrom teaching). Dont want to do the MSc in Physics but, I am interested in what you said in your last paragraph. Could you direct me to them posts? Much grateful, thanks.

sk1105: Good point... CFA def' looks like the way to go... and yes analysts is the thing im good at... But you said there are other qualifications (or was it qualities)... i already trade at home (have been for over 10 yrson and off). I just want to get into the finance (not accounting... did the first bit of the CIMA but found that pay wise I had to start at the bottom of the pay scale ie im stuck in a wage trap... prob'y get paid more than some accountants at the moment).

Just want to know whats out there (career wise) to get involved in the Financial Markets world. Does my current trading experience and data count? Also, I want to fill in any gaps of the knowledge too (especially the technical side).

BTW how long on average can it take to do a CFA (and do i really need to be in the field of work?):?:

MaxiV said:

Thank you all for your swift replies.

Yoshi: I intend for a career change and not to use it in my current science teaching post. However, thanks for saying 37 is not too late to change; made me feel better.

Gooseman: cost is not an issue... but is it true I need to be in the job field to do CFA?

scose-no-doubt: I'm still in my job but thinking of change to my passion in the Markets and get more involved instead of doing this at home early in the morning or last thing at night (and come awayfrom teaching). Dont want to do the MSc in Physics but, I am interested in what you said in your last paragraph. Could you direct me to them posts? Much grateful, thanks.

sk1105: Good point... CFA def' looks like the way to go... and yes analysts is the thing im good at... But you said there are other qualifications (or was it qualities)... i already trade at home (have been for over 10 yrson and off). I just want to get into the finance (not accounting... did the first bit of the CIMA but found that pay wise I had to start at the bottom of the pay scale ie im stuck in a wage trap... prob'y get paid more than some accountants at the moment).

Just want to know whats out there (career wise) to get involved in the Financial Markets world. Does my current trading experience and data count? Also, I want to fill in any gaps of the knowledge too (especially the technical side).

BTW how long on average can it take to do a CFA (and do i really need to be in the field of work?):?:

Click to expand...

MaxiV,

I wouldnt go wasting your time with anything IMC or CISI (lower than FSA level 4) - these are basically benchmark exams - plus, there are NO exemptions from CFA at any level from any other body which might be worth noting.

I know a few chaps who have completed the CFA exams in 18 month (started at the December level 1 stage), I also know people who have picked up the notes 5 weeks before the exam and passed (atleast that's what they told people) but these guys are usually the exeption to the rule - I'm currently a candidate, I'd say if you're thinking about it and have the time and have a natural and keen interest in financial markets then its certainly worth doing - the only problem is the volume and breadth of the learning involved. Difficult but not impossible at level 1.

http://www.investopedia.com/exam-guide/cfa-level-1/ethics-standards/

When you register for the exam you'll be given the CFAI books which are obviously very good if a little dry. The Notes are well worth getting but a little on the expensive side

http://www.schweser.com/cfa/cfa1.php
You can usually get these off gumtree after june for knockdown prices.
Other cheaper providers include people like Allen Resources - the test database
http://www.allenresources.com/ cost $99 - direct questions (not much like the CFA actual) but good enough for learning prompts. you can jack it all off the web though... although this (as the CFAI will drill into you) is a "violation of standards".

Also note that no matter how long it takes you to pass all three stages you wont recevie your charter unless you know other charterholders and have had 3-4 years of investment decision-making experience.

Hope this helps!

Thanks Don-e

Yes that really does help... i was going to ask about the CISI qualification too, but you sorta mentioned it here. BTW what is the difference between IMC and CISI?

you say you have been trading 10 years, are you profitable ? what do you trade. why not trade your own account ?

FOREX and FTSE, S&P, Did do NYMEX too and other commodities such as gold. But now concentrating and perfecting FOREX esp GBP/USD (through IGIndex). Will move onto FTSE and others later. I Have done well and been through my major losses when have got my trading emotion tuned to the Nth degree... everything falls into place with a good trading system. I enjoy it but want to learn more on what is going on out there and how all the mechanics of the markets work. Hence, wanting to go for the IMC or CFA; prob. more of a matter of interest then for career change... but wouldn't mind having a dabble in that world.

If it's just a matter of interest, I would suggest the IMC, as the CFA is a major undertaking. That said, you will probably know a fair bit of the subjects in there and could learn a lot of the reest from books, such as the FT Guide to Investing.

MaxiV said:

Thanks Don-e

Yes that really does help... i was going to ask about the CISI qualification too, but you sorta mentioned it here. BTW what is the difference between IMC and CISI?

Click to expand...

Simply - one's respected, the other isnt. Think most employers ask for the IMC for your basic threshold exams - the CISI Cert programme it the alternative I completed the level 3 exams (regs, secs, der, risk) couple of years ago - took about 6 months to get through - would have preferred to dedicate that time to CFA level one which is a diploma level or FSA level 5 (you'll need an FSA regs on top of this if you want FSA registry). I dont know much about the new Level 4 exams - nobody does and this is why a lot of people will just take the CFA route (IMC - which is now FSA level 4 or CFA) a little more effort gets you a lot more qualification wise IMO.

I think you can still do the level 3 CISI's which arent particulary but no doubt these will become redundant.

Cheers,

The level 3 exams will still be sufficient for you to be registered with the FSA, so long as you don't work on the retail side. If you're a trader for a bank with the old IMC, then you're not affected.

Mmmmmm im inclined to do just the CFA only... but now maybe IMC to see if its for me and them do the first level CFA... but this looks like a waste of time... so, as someone has said already on this thread, to just crack on with the CFA...

Is there any use of just doing the first part of the CFA?

MaxiV,

The IMC is worthwhile doing based on your decision to make a career move as it is the recognised benchmark for knowledge. Additionally new regulation that came about at the end of 2010 recognises people with the IMC + CFA level one as being able to legally provide investment advice which when applying for jobs is a going to hold you in good stead for a number of positions.

https://secure.cfauk.org/qualifications/rdr.html

Tezzer said:

MaxiV,

The IMC is worthwhile doing based on your decision to make a career move as it is the recognised benchmark for knowledge. Additionally new regulation that came about at the end of 2010 recognises people with the IMC + CFA level one as being able to legally provide investment advice which when applying for jobs is a going to hold you in good stead for a number of positions.

https://secure.cfauk.org/qualifications/rdr.html

Click to expand...

Had a read of that... and thanks.... i think thats what i'll do now, but next year... too much on this year.... will see what i do closer to the time. Thanks again.

I am also thinking of adding a degree like the CFA to my normal german university education but I am not sure how learning for both University Master degree and CFA will go together.

I used to work at an asset managers. The IMC was treated as a way to get you FSA registered to allow you to do FSA monitored Functions.

The CFA is a lot harder and is required by some companies to show that they have cleaver people running your money. If you want to work for the sell side then they really don't care if you have it or not at some places.

My question is to both of you what do you actually want to do in finance. There are so many jobs in Finance that you will have to specify that you want to be an analyst or to be a fund manager to actually need the CFA.

I always have seen the CFA as a stamp for a person or employer to show that they understand how to run money and analyse a stock, it doesn't mean your a good manager of money or can make money if you have it.

If your 37 doing the CFA is probably not worth it. But really again what job are you looking to enter.

nicktids said:

I used to work at an asset managers. The IMC was treated as a way to get you FSA registered to allow you to do FSA monitored Functions.

The CFA is a lot harder and is required by some companies to show that they have cleaver people running your money. If you want to work for the sell side then they really don't care if you have it or not at some places.

My question is to both of you what do you actually want to do in finance. There are so many jobs in Finance that you will have to specify that you want to be an analyst or to be a fund manager to actually need the CFA.

I always have seen the CFA as a stamp for a person or employer to show that they understand how to run money and analyse a stock, it doesn't mean your a good manager of money or can make money if you have it.

If your 37 doing the CFA is probably not worth it. But really again what job are you looking to enter.

Click to expand...

For me it would be more to Analyze more then anything... and it would probably be for myself and my trading plan with the added bonus to get into the field myself with the finance industry. In addition, it is more of a passion and interest rather than a career move... Again, i am a Science Teacher who has found and worked on a small number of great systems that has worked well for me and am waiting until it make 4 times as much profit a month (or the year ie 4:1 ratio) due to the wonderful works of compounding for me to leave teaching altogether and maybe do something else part time or even FT... or, even for free for the experience and the buzz (if any) in finance area ... somewhere that involves what i do already and, being a scientist, love analyzing things.

And i appreciate your honesty with my age and the worth of doing the full CFA quals and wasting my time and effort (and you maybe right). But, i have been told by another CFA member that he has another person in the industry just finished his CFA and is working well and is in his 40's.

But i don't want to slog for someone else early morning (actually i dont mind early morning) till very late at night (well i am a family man). It seems that type of work is all for them youngsters out there in their 20's with no other family commitments; and when they move up the rank spending less time at work, earning more and spending more time (and money) with the family... I think that train may have gone for me (unless there are other positions 9-5 where i just analyze and come home to a family instead of traveling around the world getting clients etc etc; not TOO bothered about pay, just want the experience... well... as long as its not too lower than a teachers top of the scale pay...)

So your a scientist. What type of scientist. Do you have a degree in Chemistry or Physics.

The only analysts that are in demand in the world of finance are Quants or Quantitative Analysts.

You may be able to find somewhere that will take you if you can prove your coding and mathematical skills. But you will be starting off at the Junior level and would be paid quite well. But you will have to prove yourself.

There are specific Quant courses you could take to become accredited.

On the other hand what type of analysis were you thinking of doing? There is analysis in many jobs in Finance. Really have you been thinking of front office role involved in making decisions for trading. You could look at the opportunities in the Back and middle office. There are roles for portfolio analysts who describe in detail where returns on a fund came from. Also moving in to become an accountant could be a wise move.

You will get paid more than teaching but will never shoot the lights out so to say as the front office guys can do.

This being a trading board your doing analysis for trading I'm sure.

You mention a guy at 40 who did the CFA well yeah as you say he was already in the industry.