[Anonymous]

I am not downplaying that it is a tough exam to pass and it is a great way to filter out the people who really want it vs those who don’t.

But it’s just a strange concept that you can literally study your life away and have a great understanding of the complex material, yet on the actual exam it only tests you on a small fraction of what you actually studied for. And the exam might completely leave out an important topic that you were well prepared for then randomly test you on the most foreign/irrelevant/easily-overlooked material.

That just means someone can get very lucky and see several questions with material they knew well (but not necessarily prepared for the exam as a whole) vs someone who got unlucky because they got the random questions out of left field but knew most of the material and was prepared for the more complex questions.

For a “uniform” “standardized” exam, by the reasoning above, I would say many people pass with a lot of luck on their side and others just get unlucky.

Anyone experience this firsthand? Correct me if I’m wrong. Thoughts? 🙂

[CPAcandidate3]

Could there be a fraction of luck involved if you are right on the border of passing? sure.. Is it a material factor on whether someone will pass all 4 parts or not? No way.

[Anonymous]

Idk it's hard to say. Honestly you might study for an entire exam yet you're only tested on 20-25% of the material, there is going to be a significant variance between each person's testing content.

If you get a test that has an area you are well prepared for and see 10-15 questions that are related to that topic, that is quite lucky. If those questions were areas you happened to overlook, then you're out of luck. And of course if you prepared for EVERYTHING (as you should), then it wouldn't be an issue, but that doesn't take away that there is some luck involved as well if you happen to get questions that have been well prepared for vs the weaker areas.

[Birdman]

I think, ultimately, luck might play a part in passing, but it won't play a part in failing.

I.E. if you don't prepare fully and are weak in some areas, you might get lucky and not be tested on those areas. But if you are adequately prepared, you're not going to get “unlucky” to the tune of failing.

FAR- 74, 78 (10/15)
BEC- 73
REG- 65, 88 (05/16)
AUD- 7/16

[CPAcandidate3]

You are looking at it part by part. What I'm saying is when it comes to passing all four parts I don't think luck is a factor. If you're going into into these exams unprepared you're not going pass all four parts.

[krstnam]

First time with FAR I decided to skip Not-For-Profit. I was like 8-12%, instead of learning a new topic, I'll just skim over it and focus my attention on more important areas. Smart or stupid? Lucky or Unlucky? Let's go with stupid and unlucky.

BS on 8-12%!!!!! My scores were comparable in every area except NFP where I was lower and I FAILED MISERABLY with a 54. So, how would I be average everywhere but super low in NFP and end up with such a low score? Well…I had TONS and TONS of NFP questions. 2nd try at FAR, I studied NFP as thoroughly as I did the other topics and I didn't have tons of NFP questions, I would say I had the number of NFP questions that I would have expected.

Can you get unlucky/lucky? After my FAR experience with NFP – I think it was incredibly unlucky that I got hammered with NFP, maybe if the questions were more balanced I wouldn't have had such a sad first score.

[Anonymous]

The AICPA has determined a basic level of understanding that is required. And assuming since they started doing Computer Based Testing in 2011, they have a boatload of pretest questions in their arsenal.

If we assume that each question a candidate answers has a normal distribution, they can adjust the pass rate by using a target set of questions and get the expected outcome, if the mean hasn't changed that much from window to window.

No conspiracy, just simple statistics. 🙂

[Anonymous]

I believe luck plays a 20% and the rest is preparation. I have read a lot of people in this forum guessing on the exams, living 2 sims blanks or just putting a bunch of zeros and were able to pass the exam with 2 or 3 points above the 75.

I found out i failed BEC with a 72. My strengths coming to the exam were COSO, ECO and Finance. I crammed for 3 weeks and fell confident to get a score around the low 80's.
Guess what i got the most random COSO and IT questions and only 4 eco questions which it is supposed to be from a pool of 15-20%. This is unfair but i gotta suck it up. I guess i didn't get lucky as those that passed by the minimum marging (75 & 76).

[NeedsA75]

I think luck mostly comes into play with the sims. The sims I saw varied in difficulty by a wide margin on a few of my exams. I believe the sims are really the key to passing rather than the MC even though the MC is technically worth more..

[gigabyte2001]

In my working experience I've met some people that passed the CPA and got the license and still could not do the actual work. In theory they have the requisite knowledge and skill but I honestly don't know how they passed. Same goes for MBA's. I've seen some that I honestly don't know how they get out of bed and get dressed every morning but they had a great GPA in their MBA program.

I know tests are not the only measure of competence. I have an incredibly smart, talented Accounting Manager. She happens to not test well. Test Anxiety combined with English is not her first language means her test scores are not reflective of her capability at all.

So from my view it's not the only or even necessarily best measure. It merely means you passed the 4 tests (and met the other requirements.) Unfortunately, the rest of the world doesn't see things that way.

B - 11/11/16
A - 4/16/16 87!!
R - 2/17/17
F - 7/26/16 - Waiting for 8/23

[Missy]

In my humble opinion the cpa exam teaches you to know what you don't know. I've looked up far more and sought advice more often because I'm more keenly of when there's more to a situation than what meets the eye.

Licensed Massachusetts Non Reporting CPA since 2012
Finance/Admin/HR Manager

[SomeSomeCPA]

I agree with mla. I took it upon myself as an undergraduate with a mathematics major and only professional experience in corporate financial planning/budgeting to start my CPA journey as an opportunity to learn accounting. I have passed all the exams and still have deficiencies but I've learned so much and really have a good idea of my struggle areas to work on.

FAR: 39,59,TBD
BEC: 74,79
AUD: 77
REG: September

[SaveBandit]

Yes. Part of the reason I went back to get my CPA later in life is because of all the stupid ones I encountered in my career. To me, the only thing it really proves is that you probably have a decent work ethic…or at least, you did at one point.

4 for 4

FAR 85
AUD 94
BEC 86
REG 90

[Theodore]

knowing and understanding the material is one thing, applying it is another. Anyone can test and pass with flying colors, but not anyone can apply the material. This is why I think requiring that a candidate be under the supervision of a CPA is a great idea. Not just any CPA is going to sign off on the experience requirement. Accounting is an important profession and I am sure CPAs do not want incompetent CPA's in the field. As far as luck goes, You need to be well rounded with the material, this will prepare you for whatever question they throw your way. From my experience, I decided to skip one or two sections from each section thinking that i wasn't going to get tested on them or that If I studied well other sections (the ones with a bigger percentage) I was going to pass. Nope, I was wrong. I don't know how much luck plays in these exams, but luck will not get you through all four sections.

FAR: 66, 76!
REG: 76!
AUD: 72, 9/7/2016
BEC: TBA

Don't Stop When You Are Tired, Stop When You Are Done.

[Anonymous]

It's not a good test of competence. It's like any other board exam – you can study and memorize everything, pass it, and forget it all the next day. It seems like the new version of the exam is going to test on a somewhat deeper level but I still don't think the exam has much connection to real-world ability. You can be book smart and not street smart. Those who are street smart seem to go farther these days.

What it seems to be more of is a test of endurance, for most people. Some have zero issues passing all four in a very short amount of time. Good for them, I guess, but does that make them better accountants? No. Those who are in the majority usually have to invest a good chunk of time into it before they pass. Even if they don't have to do re-takes, they have to do a lot of work in order to be ready to pass.

Even with the new exam format, I don't think the CPA will ever have a lot of prestige. I've said this before on other threads. It's not a doctoral degree. And despite the low pass rates, I don't think it's as blisteringly hard as med school board exams or the BAR exam or any number of other super high level exams….although, I don't know how those others are scored. The AICPA's way of scoring the CPA exam is beyond bonkers and that's all I'm gonna say about that. But, the general perception of the CPA, and some may disagree with me, is that if you have it, you know how to bang out correct numbers. And, the unemployment rate of CPAs is almost zero – I think that's why a lot of people want their CPA license.

I'll agree with OP that it's a good test to weed out those who don't really want it….although if you don't want it, why waste your time and money? Do you want it, or do you need it? Or both? As for me, I don't need it. I want it…I don't know how really badly I want it, but I'd like to have it. And I've dropped too much time and money into it to quit!

[Goingallin]

I think the cpa doesn't determine if you are smarter or dumber than someone who doesn't have it. But one of the reasons why managers hire candidates from big four is bc they are discipline and most are hard working. Hard to be lazy when you're working around the clock doing crappy work with low pay so in the same sense someone who has a cpa proved they were able to dedicate and sacrifice to get the license. It's accounting, not rocket science. Anyone can learn or do it but managers want to find people who are motivated, discipline, and willing to put in the time and effort.

Like I said it's accounting for heaven sake, the only way to make it harder is to make the questions trickIer or increase the exam time to exhaust the candidates lol.

I'm sure the aicpa doesn't expect anyone to retain most of the info. The cpa is to test that you have the ability to understand the material if you had to research. Hence the research questions. I believe the research questions is weighted more heavily than other sims bc they know you'll forget so it's important you know how to use the tool to get answers in real life situation.

[Author]

Replies