I had some dealings with a Toronto investment firm and was appalled by the unprofessional behaviour of the CFP I dealt with. What kind of training do they have ? If he is an example of what they know and the standard of professionalism they exercise it is truly scary. Any other experiences ? Thanks.
The CFP designation means that the certificant has passed a qualifying course of education, passed an exam (which has an appallingly high failure rate), and completed two years of related work experience. When the designation was first introduced, people who'd been working in the industry for a long time were "grandfathered" in and became CFPs without passing the exam.
Ongoing certification requires avoiding insolvency, adhering to a set of ethical and professional standards, and completing a certain number of continuing education activities. If you have a complaint about the behaviour of a CFP certificant, you should make the complaint here:
The CFP certification is NOT a guarantee of anything but (what I consider) a basic standard of knowledge and competence. If you feel you've received poor service, I urge you to follow the complaint procedures outlined in the above link.
The CFP designation means that the certificant has passed a qualifying course of education, passed an exam (which has an appallingly high failure rate), and completed two years of related work experience.
As a certificant, MG, I'd be curious to hear what your thoughts are with respect to the high failure rate of CFP certification exams. I have my own theory base on my experience with the course material -- I have a Financial Planning Certificate, however I never bothered to sit for the registration exams as I wasn't involved in the industry.
MG : Thanks . I did file a complaint and three months later got a one-line reply from an FPSC lawyer saying the advisor hadn't breached any of their "standards". I must try to find out what those "standards" are.
I hear over and over again that the exam is "too hard," the material on the exam is "not relevant anyways" and that people who pass the test "are just good at writing exams - but that has nothing to do with being a successful financial planner" [whatever that means].
My own conclusion is that the qualifying courses are not doing an adequate job in setting the students up to pass the exams. That seems obvious, right? The students who pass the qualifying courses believe they are set up to pass the CFP exams...but evidently this is not the case. I do think that many people who take the qualifying courses have no real intention of working as bona fide financial planners - you get some kind of financial planning certificate for passing the qualifying courses and for many people, that is sufficient to work as a bank teller or licensed assistant in a brokerage.
There's probably an element of overcertification or certification creep or whatever you might call it - I suspect some brokerage and bank employers require CFP certification for a certain percentage of their workforce, and/or in order to climb the ladder - and this is a way to weed out duds. But is CFP certification really required for all of those positions? I don't know.
But as I've said before, I think the material in the CFP coursework and exams is a BASIC and LOW standard for people working in the financial services industry. I think being able to pass the exam is an absolute MINIMUM standard for anyone working with other peoples' money.
MG: Well, I have read through it a few times and it is like reading the Bible; the conduct requirements are so broad they could mean anything you want them to. Even Conrad Black could be disabused of wrong using these criteria. So I think I will just say Amen to this little issue and remain convinced that my prior impressions have been confirmed. Anyway thanks for your help.
I'm not sure how helpful what I wrote was; it was mostly about the knowledge content and not about the ethical standards.
In any event I suspect the CFP certification over time will serve more and more as an economic moat. It is used to keep some in the castle and keep others out. But - as you've found out (and indeed as some of its critics assert) - the designation itself may be largely meaningless in providing an assurance of quality.
MG: I can't add anything to what you say except, Amen. It would be interesting to present the basics of my charges of professional negligence and see how others would judge the case. No doubt others have similar complaints. Cheers.
MG, how would you say the CFP stacks up to the CFA?
How about the CSC?
Is the CFP just one exam?
Is it worth taking for personal interest?
I know the CFA failure rate is insane when you break it down to all three levels. Each level seems to have a 50-60% pass rate, so it's likely less than 15% pass the whole thing in one go.
I have the IFIC and CSC and they're a waste of money. I wrote IFIC before the textbook arrived in the mail. I only read the regulation part of the CSC to know all the different rules and crap about Quebec.
The CFA is much more onerous than the CFP but they cover different material, so they aren't entirely comparable. Many people only do one level of the CFA coursework.
I would agree, MG, that the CFP designation is increasingly being used as a barrier to entry. Ultimately, the first priority of the vast majority of CFP charter holders is sales as that is the current business model.
With respect to the high failure rate of the CFP certification exams, I have always had an inkling that they were designed purposely to have a high failure rate. It makes the designation more exclusive and thus more valuable. The lady that we work with at our bank had to write it 3 times before she passed. I wouldn't consider her an ill informed idiot.
My big problem with the whole process was that there was a 50% weighting given to case studies that appeared to be presented with the idea that the solution was black and white. If you weren't on the same page as the person who set the exam, you were out of luck. Too bad the real world doesn't work that way. Worse yet, you pass or you fail; there was never an opportunity to learn from it as to what you did wrong and what was deemed to be the correct solution. The only alternative seems to be to shell out a few hundred dollars to take a CFP exam prep course prior to sitting for the certification exam to improve the odds of passing. There is nothing wrong with putting a lot of weight on case studies, but with the constraints of time, it always seemed unrealistic to me to expect a cut and dried solution gleaned from limited information. (I can recall myself and a classmate getting into heated e-mail discussions with our instructor over this very problem. (The instructors response was prefaced with: "I don't normally discuss exam results and answers to the set questions.") It left me with the distinct impression that I was playing someone else's game and I was being told that if I didn't like the rules, I could just pick up my marbles and go home.
Meh. The exams are written by a committee, not just one person. I don't know that there's a singular agenda at work, in the sense that one person's opinion has sway in how the exams are constructed. I also don't think that exams are really supposed to emulate the real world - they are intended to test your knowledge base while operating with constraints.
I also think case studies are "more realistic" in that you don't usually get rapid-fire a/b/c/d questions in a professional setting - the case studies are a much closer approximation of the requirement to synthesize knowledge.
I took TWO exam prep courses and I thought they were extremely valuable, and would recommend them. They helped me develop a coherent set of study notes and showed me some memorization tricks for formulas.
I haven't looked at the course outline for the CFP program so I have no idea what they are expected to know. My complaint is about professional negligence and selective oversight of accounts based solely on the fees generated. I think most investors suspect there will be ,to some degree, a fee-based focus by financial workers but it my case it became openly ridiculous . But as far as the CFP standards council lawyer was concerned that was OK. Going forward I now understand the degree of respect this appelation deserves.
Didn't read anything to do with the CSC and passed both the exams. Would like to get CFA someday maybe. Hard labour for big money is more enticing right now though. Likely Alberta bound!
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Canadian Money Forum
684.7K posts
166.2K members
Since 2009
A forum community dedicated to Canadian personal finance enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about investing, stock portfolios, equities, frugality, real estate, market trading, taxation, retirement, and more!