# CSC vs. CFP vs CFA



## MoneyGal

Oh dear. The Chum Bucket is a fictional restaurant owned by Sheldon Plankton, and located across the street from the much more successful Krusty Krab, owned by Eugene Krab. All on the Spongebob Squarepants show (I have two little kids, have I mentioned that? ) And...Spongebob lives in a pineapple under the sea!

Back to Sponge_1. You know, if you want to learn about investing, I recommend you take the courses from the Canadian Securities Institute. The only problem is that they are ridiculously expensive. The financial planning courses which lead to the CFP exam are also another interesting thought. There are many course providers and these, too, are also expensive. 

But here's my rationale: which may not apply to Sponge, but could possibly apply to other posters. If you take the CSC or the CFP coursework, you might be out $1000 or even more. But amortized over your investing lifetime, that $1000 might actually be well-spent. 

Anyways. I am writing quickly and over my lunch break, and this isn't my most thoughtful post. But I do sort of wonder whether taking the CSC courses might be of interest to other people here. (Disclaimer: I hold the CFP certification and I am a former investment advisor, formerly working on the IDA [now IIROC] platform; i.e., not mutual funds only.)


----------



## FrugalTrader

MoneyGal, that's an interesting thought. I did the CSC as more of a hobby project, but I'm wondering, how much more challenging is obtaining the CFP?


----------



## MoneyGal

I'd say the CFP = 5 CSCs. Why? Because the CSC has a much, much narrower focus. The CFP requires competency in wide range of financial planning topics, beyond investing and "know your client," and including estate planning, family law, tax planning, and risk management (i.e., insurance) topics. 

Plus the CFP exam is related to as brutally hard. (And it is about to get harder: I'm on the item writing committee preparing questions for this year's candidates!) 

Fewer than half the people who sit the exam pass it, and the pass rate goes down, not up, with subsequent tries. The November 2009 pass rate was the highest it's been in years, at 44.7% (ouch!). (First-time writers did better, at just over 50%, in November.)

IMO, it's a completely different thing passing two one-hour, multiple choice exams separated by time (the CSC exam) versus a six-hour, one-time, integrated exam, half of which is case studies (still multiple choice, though!).


----------



## FrugalTrader

Wow, thanks for the explanation. I had no idea that obtaining a CFP would be so challenging. What is the greatest value of obtaining the CFP? Greater industry recognition?

Any idea how obtaining a CFP compares to obtaining a CFA?


----------



## MoneyGal

We could start a whole separate thread on this. 

From my POV, I am interested in financial planning *in addition to* investing - and the CSC is not a financial planning course of study or designation. You could almost think about the CSC as your "union card" for selling investment products. 

I had my own reasons for obtaining the CFP. I am not now working as an advisor, but I still work in the field of personal finance. The CFP is *the* designation of choice for me - a CSC would be of no use to me in my current role...it is not a professional designation, it is a licensing requirement. So when I left the advisor world, I let my CSC licence expire. 

As for the CFA: this is a quant designation. If you wanted to be a back-office staff member in an investment shop, you'd need this. For front-office (i.e., client-facing), you need the CSC (for your license). The CFP is the next designation in the stream for client-facing work. 

If you wanted to do more quant (back-office) work, you could also do a Masters of Finance. It's a toss-up to me whether one is preferable to the other...you could think about the CFA as a "professional" (or "hands-on") designation and the Masters of Finance as an "academic" (more "hands-off") designation. 

These are all generalizations and broadly speaking they apply to higher-end situations in which you are managing relatively serious piles of money. There are lots of people using the title "financial advisor" or "financial planner" who don't even have the CSC license, let alone the CFP or the CFA.


----------



## Four Pillars

FrugalTrader said:


> Wow, thanks for the explanation. I had no idea that obtaining a CFP would be so challenging. What is the greatest value of obtaining the CFP? Greater industry recognition?
> 
> Any idea how obtaining a CFP compares to obtaining a CFA?


Not sure if I'm adding or subtracting from what MoneyGal has said but my take on the CFA and CFP is that the CFP is exactly what the title says - financial planning. Budgets, investments, taxes etc - all the personal finance kind of stuff. Best suited for a...financial planner type who meets with people and helps them work on their finances.

The CFA is far more hard-core investment oriented with lots of focus on investment theory (ie efficient market models etc), technical investment stuff like bond pricing, option pricing etc. It's better suited for someone who is exclusively doing some sort of serious investment work ie research analyst, portfolio manager etc.

I found the CFA to be very interesting (I passed level I and took level 2 but didn't write the exam for level II when my career changed). I haven't taken any of the CFP although I'm somewhat familiar with the material. I took the CSC.

I'm not really sure how useful either designation is unless you can apply it to your work. For an individual who just wants to improve their own knowledge I would suggest finding out the course material of a relevant course and just do the reading yourself.


----------



## MoneyGal

FP: you are adding. 

I happen to work with derivatives and options now (at a theoretical level) and believe me, none of that was covered either in the CSC or the CFP except at the most basic level (i.e., one or two paragraphs on how puts and calls work, so you can memorize the definition and spit it out in an exam question. Mos def no requirement to calculate the value of a put option or to decompose a financially-engineered product to find the embedded puts and calls that make it work...)


----------



## FrugalTrader

Cleaner to have a separate thread discussing the issues of the differences between CSC, CFP and CFA.


----------



## FrugalTrader

FP, how was the first level of CFA? Was it a killer exam like the CFP?


----------



## Spidey

I've taken, and passed the CSC about 10 years ago (was considering a career change at the time). Even though I'm the kind of guy who is constantly reading about investing, I found the course to be extremely dry (possibly not appropriate for the casual investor).


----------



## Four Pillars

FrugalTrader said:


> FP, how was the first level of CFA? Was it a killer exam like the CFP?


The CFA exams are very tough. There is a lot of material and there is only one long, long exam.

That said, the material itself isn't rocket science but if you don't have much of a background in finance then there is a lot of learning to do. It takes a huge amount of time and when I took it, the exam was only once a year so there was no flexibility in terms of schedule. I can't imagine doing it now. 

I've never taken the CFP courses so I can't really comment on those.


----------



## MoneyGal

I see that the pass rates for the CFA exams are similar to the pass rates for the CFP exam. I don't know whether that means one can conclude they are "equally tough" or just that candidates in aggregate are equally unprepared for the rigour of the exam. 

In theory, candidates for the CFP exam are prepared for the exam because in order to qualify, you must have passed an approved course of study with, presumably, its own exams. 

I got a call when I was midway through my CFP course of study inviting me to something for their "top students." I was a little mystified that I was a "top student" because, although my grades were very decent, I wasn't pulling down 95% marks. "How can I be a top student?" I asked the guy on the other end of the phone. "It's because 75% of your peers [the people who started the course at the same time as I did] have already dropped out," he responded.


----------



## FrugalTrader

After the CFP, what is the next step to obtain the ability to "practice"?


----------



## MoneyGal

The CFP is not a practice designation. 

If you want to sell investment products, you need a license - either the mutual-fund-specific license, the RESP license, or the all-in license. (And if you want to sell derivatives, you need a separate license for that, too.)

The CFP is a "professional" designation and is a requirement for some (usually banking) jobs, but it doesn't bring you any additional powers or capabilities that a sales license already provides. Make sense?

Now, if you want to provide investment *advice,* without providing specific buy-sell recommendations for particular products, you can do that without having a sales license. However, you still don't need the CFP for that.


----------



## scomac

Four Pillars said:


> I've never taken the CFP courses so I can't really comment on those.


I have and I hold a Financial Planning Certificate from our local community college. This is the prerequisite course for sitting for the CFP exam. Our instructor set many of the questions for the registration exam and as a result the various course materials were quite extensive over the whole host of topics that encompasses personal financial planning.

When I took the courses (over two years), most of my class mates were in the industry with only a couple of us outsiders. At the time, I had an inclination to get into the industry, but thought differently of that when it became rather obvious through conversations that the main role of advisor was to move product. As it stands, I don't regret for a minute taking these courses as they have provided me with valuable insight into a wide range of topics that affect personal finance. As it stands, the knowledge base is more useful, I believe, than a strictly investment based course.

I found the most challenging course in the series to be the course that dealt with case studies. These are tough when making recommendations based on limited input and I believe this is why the pass rate is so low. In many cases, it was extremely difficult to choose between different courses of action as more than one was often applicable and appropriate. You really had to see the case for the merits that the test setter did.

At the time that I took the courses, the tuition totalled ~$1400 for the four courses; expensive, but worth it as I know I have earned at least that much back. The most recent course catalogue from the college I attended has the courses currently priced in >$2200, so that's a very big jump in just three years. I question whether I would do it again just for personal interest.


----------



## MoneyGal

Oh yeah. And if you want to sell (life) insurance products, including seg funds and GMWBs, you need an insurance license, which is a totally separate and distinct thing from a mutual funds/RESPs/stocks and bonds license.


----------



## lonelimey

I found the CSC course very usefull especially in learning more about the bond markets. Sat the two hour exams in Dec 09 and Jan 10 and passed each first time. The cost was fairly reasonable at $880. Hope to get into the broking side of a financial company.


----------



## Robillard

The CFA program is not too expensive if you register early. I think the cost for each level is about $700-$800 depending upon the exchange rate, plus a one-time program fee for new registrants. I wouldn't advise signing up if one wants a general finance education, though I think it provides much better value an the CSC. The amount of material for the CFA program is massive, but the depth of topic coverage is good. The economics coverage is not very deep, since it is tailored to finance professionals, but it provides good coverage of financial accounting and reporting, portfolio theory, and the valuation of bonds and stock. 

I passed the level II exam last year and I'm currently working level III. 

I'm just throwing this out there, but one option for gaining knowledge of finance would be to "audit" (I think this is the right term) some finance classes at a local university or college. By "audit", I mean take the class without writing the exam and receiving no credit. My university (Simon Fraser University) let people "audit" classes for a lower fee than it normally cost to register in a course for credit. Also, my university offered many business classes in the evening, which can be more convenient for one's schedule.


----------



## andrewf

I'm happy that this thread was started as it gives me an appropriate place to ask a question I've been mulling for a while. I'm considering whether it would be plausible to do financial planning as a part-time business. The reason why I'd want it to be part-time is that it would enable me to help people without needing to do it with an eye on paying my bills. I could keep fees low and proportional to results generated (and not just AUM or products sold) without worrying about putting food on my table. 

MG, do you think this is unrealistic? If not, what course of action would you take in gaining relevant qualifications? I've a pretty strong grasp of finance already (took several corporate finance courses during my undergrad), so I don't find the idea of gaining designations intimidating.


----------



## Four Pillars

MoneyGal said:


> Now, if you want to provide investment *advice,* without providing specific buy-sell recommendations for particular products, you can do that without having a sales license. However, you still don't need the CFP for that.


So if I wanted to "open up shop" in retirement and offer financial services for people off the street - help with budgeting, investing (ie asset allocation). I don't need any kind of license for that?


----------



## Four Pillars

Robillard said:


> The CFA program is not too expensive if you register early. I think the cost for each level is about $700-$800 depending upon the exchange rate, plus a one-time program fee for new registrants.


What about the text books? When I took it, the books cost more than the course.


----------



## Sampson

I believe the CFA institute text books are now 'mandatory', since so many people were using the Schweiser notes.

The program gets expensive when you consider the failing rates and the number of redo's most people end up taking. Not a casual walk in the park and something you certainly have to devote ALOT of time to.


----------



## MoneyGal

On Sampson's point: when I took a CFP prep course, the instructor said that (based on the company's experience in coaching people through the exam) you need to spend 2h per day, every day, for six months before the exam in order to feel confident about passing it. The single variable which made the most difference, in their experience, wasn't age, or gender, or occupation, or previous experience - it was prep time. 

AndrewF and FourPillars: yes. This is the business model of (for example) Weigh House Investor Services. The specific restriction is on providing advice or other activities "in furtherance of a trade" - although I have never been able to find a concise, clear explanation of that phrase.


----------



## Sampson

I was a CFA widow for about 12 months over the past few years...  but that's all behind us now  only problem is that my wife is now used to me doing everything and taking care of her


----------



## Four Pillars

MoneyGal said:


> On Sampson's point: when I took a CFP prep course, the instructor said that (based on the company's experience in coaching people through the exam) you need to spend 2h per day, every day, for six months before the exam in order to feel confident about passing it. The single variable which made the most difference, in their experience, wasn't age, or gender, or occupation, or previous experience - it was prep time.
> 
> AndrewF and FourPillars: yes. This is the business model of (for example) Weigh House Investor Services. The specific restriction is on providing advice or other activities "in furtherance of a trade" - although I have never been able to find a concise, clear explanation of that phrase.


That's interesting. I had toyed with the idea of some sort of financial "advice" sort of career in retirement (ie volunteer maybe?) but I had assumed you could only get a career going by working with a financial services firm which I don't want to do.


----------



## Racer

Great thread.

I checked out the CFA website for my area, and it linked to this: http://www.cfainstitute.org/cfaprog/register/index.html. 

Does anyone happen to know if someone can count professional work in a profession that is not related to financial advice?

And am I understanding this right: these online exams are administered by the umbrella USA organization?


----------



## MoneyGal

You only need the work experience requirement if you don't meet the bachelor's degree requirement. And the exams are not online, they are in-person. The studying can all be done online, though.


----------



## Racer

Oh I see - thanks MG. So... you need the international passport to go to the States to write the exam?


Robillard: I was the queen of the audit course in my alma mater, but the reduced-fee audit courses at my university was only for full-time students. Non-students paid a higher fee.


----------



## MoneyGal

well - here in Toronto, the exams are in Toronto. I don't know about other cities though!


----------



## Four Pillars

MoneyGal said:


> You only need the work experience requirement if you don't meet the bachelor's degree requirement. And the exams are not online, they are in-person. The studying can all be done online, though.


Really? Has that changed because when I took it (which admittedly was 15 yrs ago) you needed 3 yrs work experience to get the designation. I don't recall a degree being a shortcut.

I think they were pretty lenient about the experience tho.


----------



## OntFA

MoneyGal said:


> On Sampson's point: when I took a CFP prep course, the instructor said that (based on the company's experience in coaching people through the exam) you need to spend 2h per day, every day, for six months before the exam in order to feel confident about passing it. The single variable which made the most difference, in their experience, wasn't age, or gender, or occupation, or previous experience - it was prep time.


That seems excessive. I did the CFP but had the backing of a business/finance degree so none of the investment and tax stuff was new for me. So, 1-2 hours daily might be required for someone who hadn't been exposed to the material in the past. But for those who have effectively spent the time on the same material in the past, nowhere near that amount of time is required.



MoneyGal said:


> AndrewF and FourPillars: yes. This is the business model of (for example) Weigh House Investor Services. The specific restriction is on providing advice or other activities "in furtherance of a trade" - although I have never been able to find a concise, clear explanation of that phrase.


I'm not sure the new registration rule still uses that phrase - in furtherance to a trade - but what it seems to mean today is giving advice on the buying or selling of securities based on an individual's circumstances. So, this is what I don't get. Why would I pay someone an hourly fee to look at my portfolio if they can't give me individual advice?



Four Pillars said:


> Really? Has that changed because when I took it (which admittedly was 15 yrs ago) you needed 3 yrs work experience to get the designation. I don't recall a degree being a shortcut.
> 
> I think they were pretty lenient about the experience tho.


I think you're talking about two different things. To gain entry into the CFA program, you need a bachelor's degree (in any discipline) or equivalent work experience. That's been the case for a long time. But Four Pillars, you are correct that you need a minimum amount of relevant work experience to then be awarded the designation. The work experience required to earn the designation is more stringent than that needed to simply enter the program.


----------



## MoneyGal

Yes to two different things. I understood Racer to be asking about the *entrance* requirements, not the designation requirements. 

OntFA: On the "advice with no registration" question: not to start a war, but you could look at the question the other way 'round, as well. 

For example: Take a look at the question from a newbie (elsewhere in the forum) about how to understand CCA on a rental property. In order to properly answer that question, you need to both understand the tax system and take the time to explain it to the person asking. 

Now, that question has nothing to do with buying or selling a security - but real estate is part of that person's portfolio, and they want/need advice. So the "other way 'round" to look at the question might be, "why would I get a designation which licenses me to provide investment advice only, when I want to provide advice and guidance on a much broader range of topics?"

My point is only that the CSC and an investment license is a *narrow* frame of reference. Adding the CFP designation adds a much broader frame around the perspective you have and the kinds of advice you can competently offer (and how to get paid for that advice is a whole different story). 

And obviously you aren't in the target market for the services of Weigh House or any other similar service providers. However, there are people out there - whether they are DIYers who nonetheless want someone to "bounce ideas off of" or people transitioning into retirement and who need a more comprehensive plan than "when you need income, we'll just sell some stuff." Whether YOU want or need that advice doesn't mean that advice is not wanted or needed by others.


----------



## MoneyGal

Coming back to say that an unlicensed financial planner can give you very specific advice. It just can't be about very specific securities. However, a planner could:

- analyse your portfolio (return, volatility, fees, asset allocation, tax)
- analyse your risk tolerance (how much do you think this portfolio will return; how much risk do you think you are exposed to)
- extract your goals (do you need income from this portfolio; if so, when; tax consequences of holding/buying/selling)
- create an asset allocation strategy
- create a distribution strategy
- analyse retirement readiness and whether the portfolio is an appropriate income portfolio

etc., etc., etc. Those are just a few things I thought of off the top of my head that aren't specifically related to buying and selling individual securities in a client portfolio.


----------



## andrewf

MoneyGal said:


> On Sampson's point: when I took a CFP prep course, the instructor said that (based on the company's experience in coaching people through the exam) you need to spend 2h per day, every day, for six months before the exam in order to feel confident about passing it. The single variable which made the most difference, in their experience, wasn't age, or gender, or occupation, or previous experience - it was prep time.
> 
> AndrewF and FourPillars: yes. This is the business model of (for example) Weigh House Investor Services. The specific restriction is on providing advice or other activities "in furtherance of a trade" - although I have never been able to find a concise, clear explanation of that phrase.


I don't think what I suggest is realistic if one should have CFP to do it. It requires several years full-time experience in that field, which would basically entail working for a financial planning firm--something I am not interested in, at least on a full-time basis.


----------



## MoneyGal

Don't write it off yet. You could, as one path, do the CFP coursework and pass the exam, and then have your volunteer/consulting work be the work experience which you use to obtain your designation after two years. (That is, you do NOT need to work in a financial services firm. You don't even need to do paid work to meet this requirement.)

Does that make sense? Experience is *part* of the process towards designation, but you can do all the coursework and the exam first, and then get the designation afterwards. 

Whether or not one "should" have a CFP in order to do what you are suggesting - CFP-holders are a minority in the financial services industry. I wouldn't let that stop you!


----------



## Four Pillars

MoneyGal said:


> Don't write it off yet. You could, as one path, do the CFP coursework and pass the exam, and then have your volunteer/consulting work be the work experience which you use to obtain your designation after two years. (That is, you do NOT need to work in a financial services firm. You don't even need to do paid work to meet this requirement.)
> 
> Does that make sense? Experience is *part* of the process towards designation, but you can do all the coursework and the exam first, and then get the designation afterwards.
> 
> Whether or not one "should" have a CFP in order to do what you are suggesting - CFP-holders are a minority in the financial services industry. I wouldn't let that stop you!


You talked me into it. I'm going to start the "Four Pillars Financial Checkup" consulting service. I'll come over to your house, we'll do some pushups to get invigorated, chat money for a while - you give me $500 and then I get the hell out of there.

Anybody want to be my first client?


----------



## MoneyGal

I'll see you on the pushups and raise you to kettlebells. (I'd ordinarily say burpees, but since I blew my knee out in November, I'm off burpees until I have and recover from knee reconstruction surgery.) Or maybe we can do some tae kwon do forms, or weapons training. I'm on a path to get my black belt in TKD.

Edited to say, the black belt is so I can sign off posts with "MoneyGal, CFP, TKD."  hiYA!


----------



## andrewf

Thanks, MG. It is certainly something I'll keep in mind then. I could see CFP being interesting for myself to learn more about estate planning, tax optimization, etc. I think security selection is one of the low-value-added parts of the profession.


----------



## OntFA

MoneyGal said:


> Coming back to say that an unlicensed financial planner can give you very specific advice. It just can't be about very specific securities. However, a planner could:
> 
> - analyse your portfolio (return, volatility, fees, asset allocation, tax)
> - analyse your risk tolerance (how much do you think this portfolio will return; how much risk do you think you are exposed to)
> - extract your goals (do you need income from this portfolio; if so, when; tax consequences of holding/buying/selling)
> - create an asset allocation strategy
> - create a distribution strategy
> - analyse retirement readiness and whether the portfolio is an appropriate income portfolio
> 
> etc., etc., etc. Those are just a few things I thought of off the top of my head that aren't specifically related to buying and selling individual securities in a client portfolio.


Fair points MoneyGal. If we're talking more generally about financial planning - not just investing - I can see the value in it. But I don't see the value in going to see a firm like Weigh House where I'm primarily concerned about investments because the client has to then pay somebody else to select securities for them. Danger in paying more but it may depend on the specific portfolio.

There is surely value in things like risk assessments, strategy design, etc. but an advisor can only do so much without a license. The advisor can't get too detailed with recommendations on drawing down the portfolio since that would involve advice to an individual on selling her investments.

I don't even thing firms like WH can say a portfolio is appropriate for any individual. They can say that the asset mix seems appropriate but saying the "portfolio" is appropriate, which is made up of specific securities, seems like a gray area at best and offside at worst. In that case, the advisor is commenting, indirectly, on the suitability of the individual holdings for the investor. And that's a no-no from my understanding.

I think WH and firms like them (i.e. Steward Kett) fill a need in the market place. But I don't see the value where the focus is investment advice given what cannot or should not be done in the absence of a license.


----------



## andrewf

MoneyGal said:


> Don't write it off yet. You could, as one path, do the CFP coursework and pass the exam, and then have your volunteer/consulting work be the work experience which you use to obtain your designation after two years. (That is, you do NOT need to work in a financial services firm. You don't even need to do paid work to meet this requirement.)
> 
> Does that make sense? Experience is *part* of the process towards designation, but you can do all the coursework and the exam first, and then get the designation afterwards.
> 
> Whether or not one "should" have a CFP in order to do what you are suggesting - CFP-holders are a minority in the financial services industry. I wouldn't let that stop you!


Maybe they've changed the eligibility requirements, but from my reading, you cannot complete the program this way.


----------



## MoneyGal

Here's the specific link from the FPSC website: 

_Qualifying experience may be earned within a five year period that is prior to, concurrent with, or subsequent to the education and examination requirements.​_
However, I'm wrong about the volunteer part - you have to provide financial planning services (the "qualifying experience") for compensation.


----------



## andrewf

Well, you could work for $1, right?

But the requirement to pack 3 year FTE experience into 5 year period makes part time seem unrealistic.


----------



## MoneyGal

...not to nit-pick, but it's two years. And I see your point, for sure.


----------



## highlandjen

I just wanted to add that CSC is NOT a professional designation. It's just a course of study that qualifies you for certain licensing privileges. I took the CFP courses and passed the exam on first sitting in 2006. I always laugh when I come across some insurance salesperson that has the letters CSC listed after his name on his business card. 

I have also previously taken the CSC course. I would agree that the CSC has a very narrow focus on investments and very little focus on broad based financial planning. In my opinion, the CSC alone will not prepare anyone to be a financial planner. 

The CFP courses, while they go into much more detail about financial planning issues, are also not nearly specific enough to provide anyone with enough information to offer their services as a financial planner on their own, which is why the work experience component is so incredibly important. I would also add that work experience (that must be validated by another party) helps to protect the integrity of the CFP designation because there are generally compliance officers involved in a professional work setting that help to ensure that we are adhering to the CFP Code of Ethics. No system is perfect but I figure that some oversight is better than none!

I have considered the CFA designation but felt that ultimately, it's really intended for people who are interested in high level money management, rather than financial planning. I have not done the CFA courses so I'm not really equipped to comment, however I felt that as a financial planner, the CFA would not add value to my practice. My clients have told me that the CFP is designation they consider to be valuable. I know that it's not the letters per se that make me a valuable planner, it's my experience! 

Good luck making your decision!


----------



## Magillicutty

MoneyGal said:


> FP: you are adding.
> 
> I happen to work with derivatives and options now (at a theoretical level) and believe me, none of that was covered either in the CSC or the CFP except at the most basic level (i.e., one or two paragraphs on how puts and calls work, so you can memorize the definition and spit it out in an exam question. Mos def no requirement to calculate the value of a put option or to decompose a financially-engineered product to find the embedded puts and calls that make it work...)


Hello Money Gal....Where would one find out specifics re: Fixed Return Options (Binary)??And where do i go to view the option chains for such instruments??
Cheers, Magillicutty, Cloverdale, BC


----------



## Square Root

I have done CSC (23 years ago) and got my CFA in 1998. Agree with most posters that CFA is more geared to professional money mangers rather than planners. Having said that there is a fair amount of overlap I think. CFA was a reasonable challenge. I was helped by a MBA and CA as well as practical experience. I know plenty who started but didn't finish. Shouldn't be started lightly.


----------



## MoneyGal

Magillicutty: sorry for the delay in responding. I responded earlier but something happened to my post and I didn't come back to this thread until now. 

Anyways: I'm of no help to you. I work only in the theoretical aspects of options trading, in the field of financial modelling. To make things worse, I'm not one of the modellers; I just work with 'em. 

Good luck in your search for info.


----------



## Freddie

*What can a CFP do?*

I'm thinking of going the CFP route. What can the CFP do exactly? I'd like to be able to prepare financial plans, propose asset allocations for their portfolio, recommend securities that they should buy and perform trades for my clients as a "trading authority" (agent agreement that most brokerages provide so that someone else can trade your account for you). 

Is all that possible with a CFP designation or do I need another designation? Or is there a better route to go?

thanks,


----------

