Looking for Advice: SOA vs. IFoA, Path of Least Resistance?

[HC1994]

Originally Posted by PeppermintPatty

These. The difference of a year will not matter 4 years from now, but the credential might. You can practice in either jurisdiction with either credential, but

1) I'd do whichever my current employer preferred
2) If they didn't care, I would go SoA if I planned to end up in the US, and IFoA if I planned to end up in the UK.

If you don't know where you will end up, and if the UK doesn't require predictive analytics, I'd recommend the SoA route. Not because it's faster or easier, but because I think it will serve you well to study predictive analytics, and it will likely be easier to make time in your life (and get time from your employer) to do so if it's a credentialing requirement.

Thank you. That make sense. And I am using R fairly regularly at work so I might lean towards that as well!

Originally Posted by Marcie

Food for thought: SOA might not exist in two years.

Why? :O

[GargoyleWaiting]

Oh, and looking at the mutual recognition of fellows: https://www.actuaries.org.uk/members...iety-actuaries

If you qualify with SOA, you need at least one year’s post-qualification practical work-based experience of UK actuarial practice to get your UK fellowship.

[PeppermintPatty]

Originally Posted by Marcie

Food for thought: SOA might not exist in two years.

Originally Posted by HC1994

...
Why? :O

There is renewed talk of the SoA and the CAS merging, into a new society with a new name. But I don't expect that to affect you. There will be some society with much the same professional value to you as the current SoA, and I don't expect any transition rules for someone as far along with exams as you are to be especially awkward or onerous.

[IroningBoard]

Having worked with people who’ve had exposure to both systems, the consensus seems to be that there is no significant difference in difficulty between the two sets of exams. I do know somebody who couldn’t pass CA1 (now CP1) so did the FAP modules instead then applied for an exemption. If I remember correctly he had to pay a lot to do it. No idea where he got with that because he eventually moved out of actuarial. Also know of somebody who passed MFE because he failed CT8 a few times. Don’t know any others who have personally sat exams under both systems though.

I’d choose the path based on your long term goals. If you want to stay in the UK long term, go for IFoA. If you want to move back to America/Canada then go for SOA. If you will be in the UK for at least a few more years before moving, IFoA could work too. Fellowship exams are country specific too. If you sit the IFoA exams there’s going to be a lot of material on the UK regulatory environment and UK products and markets. I assume the same goes for SOA. If you don’t think you can handle the 6 hour exam or whatever it is, IFoA might suit you more, but know that shorter exam doesn’t always mean easier to pass. It just means the exam itself may only test a small part of the syllabus, but if you don’t want to take a big risk then you’re still going to have to learn the full syllabus to prepare.

Bear in mind you could end up paying two sets of membership fees if you want to mix and match.

[HC1994]

Originally Posted by IroningBoard

Having worked with people who’ve had exposure to both systems, the consensus seems to be that there is no significant difference in difficulty between the two sets of exams. I do know somebody who couldn’t pass CA1 (now CP1) so did the FAP modules instead then applied for an exemption. If I remember correctly he had to pay a lot to do it. No idea where he got with that because he eventually moved out of actuarial. Also know of somebody who passed MFE because he failed CT8 a few times. Don’t know any others who have personally sat exams under both systems though.

I’d choose the path based on your long term goals. If you want to stay in the UK long term, go for IFoA. If you want to move back to America/Canada then go for SOA. If you will be in the UK for at least a few more years before moving, IFoA could work too. Fellowship exams are country specific too. If you sit the IFoA exams there’s going to be a lot of material on the UK regulatory environment and UK products and markets. I assume the same goes for SOA. If you don’t think you can handle the 6 hour exam or whatever it is, IFoA might suit you more, but know that shorter exam doesn’t always mean easier to pass. It just means the exam itself may only test a small part of the syllabus, but if you don’t want to take a big risk then you’re still going to have to learn the full syllabus to prepare.

Bear in mind you could end up paying two sets of membership fees if you want to mix and match.

Thanks very much for the reply! I had a quick read at both syllabus of the Life Pricing exams, and my feeling is that the UK one is shorter. I can't 100% be certain without looking through the source materials, but that's just my initial impression?

[diputz42]

I can't comment on FSA vs FIA/FCA. I work with both people with FCAS and FIA. FCAS folks tends to quote a 7 year travel time for their credential, whereas my FIA colleagues typically quote 5 years for theirs. This is roughly confirmed by the Actuarial Lookup.

http://www.actuarial-lookup.com/travel-times
http://www.actuarial-lookup.co.uk/travel-times

Besides that, I'd echo what others have said here. Travel time shouldn't be the main criteria for deciding which credential to pursue. No one takes a fellow with less than 3 years experience seriously anyway. To me, that's more a potential red flag that maybe this person is superb technically, but may not be as well rounded in order aspects.

[IroningBoard]

Originally Posted by diputz42

I can't comment on FSA vs FIA/FCA. I work with both people with FCAS and FIA. FCAS folks tends to quote a 7 year travel time for their credential, whereas my FIA colleagues typically quote 5 years for theirs. This is roughly confirmed by the Actuarial Lookup.

http://www.actuarial-lookup.com/travel-times
http://www.actuarial-lookup.co.uk/travel-times

Besides that, I'd echo what others have said here. Travel time shouldn't be the main criteria for deciding which credential to pursue. No one takes a fellow with less than 3 years experience seriously anyway. To me, that's more a potential red flag that maybe this person is superb technically, but may not be as well rounded in order aspects.

Something to bear in mind when comparing travel times:

CAS members will usually start exams during university, and only sit one at a time. IFoA members won’t sit exams until about 6 months into their first jobs, but will then usually sit 2 or 3 “prelims” in one sitting. If you look at time between graduation and fellowship I bet they will be very similar.

For example, take a CAS member who sits the equivalent of P and FM in years 2 and 3 of university and then MLC and MFE equivalents in the first year of their job. The equivalent IfoA member will not have sat any exams until they start their job, but they’ll probably sit both P and FM together 6 months in, and then the MLC and MFE equivalents in their second six months. Because the CAS member started in their second year of university, they increase the travel time. If they wait to graduate then sit the exams together, the travel time will likely be more in line with IFoA qualification.

The IFoA average is also being brought down by people who have exemptions. If somebody is exempt from multiple exams then their travel time on actuarial lookup could be 2 or 3 years lower than somebody with no exemptions.

[764dak]

Originally Posted by IroningBoard

Having worked with people who’ve had exposure to both systems, the consensus seems to be that there is no significant difference in difficulty between the two sets of exams. I do know somebody who couldn’t pass CA1 (now CP1) so did the FAP modules instead then applied for an exemption. If I remember correctly he had to pay a lot to do it. No idea where he got with that because he eventually moved out of actuarial. Also know of somebody who passed MFE because he failed CT8 a few times. Don’t know any others who have personally sat exams under both systems though.

Would you tell anyone to do CA1 and CA2 (now CP1 and CP2) instead of FAP since they cost less?

[IroningBoard]

Originally Posted by 764dak

Would you tell anyone to do CA1 and CA2 (now CP1 and CP2) instead of FAP since they cost less?

Well for most people the cost is irrelevant because employers will be paying for everything. This person in particular failed CA1 about 4 times and got fed up of studying for it so was willing to pay out of his own pocket so he could progress towards qualification.