Hello everyone, I am writting the SOA exams externally and I'd like to seek clarifications on how someone in my position might gain exemptions for VEE.

I've used the search function and all I got was posts about attaining a certain grade in certain subjects to get exemptions. However, those are posts by those opting to enroll for an actuarial degree or are already in one.

http://actuaries.org.my/career/route-to-be...an-actuary-soa/

This post has been edited by NovusInitium: Aug 1 2014, 12:37 PM

This is true for most actuaries you would meet, especially in Malaysia. A lot of actuaries are life actuaries, and while they do use some Maths (financial mathematics to work out the values of future cash flows, survival models to model mortality or lapses, "Maths" to count ages of policyholders etc) it is nothing like the Maths that rocket scientists or astrophysicists use.

But if you are one of the few actuaries that prices derivatives, or models catastrophe risk using quantitative methods, or fits distributions to claims data, you might use a bit more difficult Maths

You'll need to take the course separately unless you're in a university which SOA recognizes and provides exemption on the VEEs

I wonder is it a tradition for students to pass 4 ~ 5 papers before even graduating now a day. I have 2 seniors that passed 5 papers (Exam P,FM, MLC, MFE and C) within 3 years of undergraduate study, and a few that passed roughly 3 papers in 2 years. I am referring to UCSI university. I am curious about the actuarial development progress of local students from UM, UKM and UTAR. How many papers do we need to pass upon graduation to stay competitive? Please share some information if you are/were an actuarial science student.

Off topic a bit.

Malaysia is very competitive because of the huge supply of graduates mainly from Malaysia, UK, USA, Australia, relative to the number and variety of positions available. You can contrast Malaysia to other countries... Australia's General Insurance industry is as big as its Life industry in terms of the number of actuaries, while it has one of the world's largest pension fund pools, and a vibrant Retirement & Employee Benefits industry. The UK is similar... other than GI and pensions, both markets also employ actuaries in areas like solvency and capital management, asset liability management, finance and investment, risk management etc. In Malaysia, some actuaries work in General but I think most are in Life... and they do pricing, valuation, reinsurance, marketing, product development, that's mainly it - there's little specialisation in or separation into capital, risk, or investment.

But I would say connections and luck are more important. It's not usually the case that the person with the most exams passed and the highest uni grades gets the job. Even overseas, it is like this... new hires, even graduates, come from a variety of backgrounds (in terms of work experience) and differ in number of exams passed. What they have in common is maybe only an Actuarial degree.

It's not 'tradition' or a must. But you should know very well that exams are important even if they do not come before work. I don't think 4 exams before graduating is a lot - true, they are external so they may be very time consuming, but they are multiple choice (some) and intended to be preliminary, and supported by your tertiary education. Those university exemptions (outside SOA or CAS) are not easy to get either, as the schools are free to set much harder exams.

I am a mature student currently going to school in Canada. I have two program choices to choose from and they are undergraduate Actuarial Mathematics program and undergraduate Civil Engineering program. I have been accepted to both programs and have to choose one of them by the end of August. I love pure math and my GPA has been excellent so far.
I hold a previous mechanical engineering degree from overseas which is not in demand very much in North America and that is why I am back to school again. I have heard that entry level actuaries would have better job opportunities in comparison with entry level civil engineers. Do you think this is true? what is the current job market like for entry level actuaries?
I understand that in order to become an entry level actuary one must study very hard for at least four yours. Beside all personal preferences and circumstances, there are other things to consider, including employment outlooks, potential income opportunities, jobs available etc that are equally or even more important. Considering all these, I would like to seek your advice and opinions and know what your thoughts are about these two educational choices. Thank you for your time.

This post has been edited by BenMO: Aug 25 2014, 08:03 AM

To you, it seems that Job Security takes priority over any other matter. However, I'd like to explore your perspectives on Mathematics before commenting. Think about the maths you’ve done so far.

(1) What do you think Mathematics is?

(2) Why is Mathematics important? (What’s this good for?)

(3) How do students go about learning Mathematics more effectively?

(4) What is the contribution of Mathematics to your professional working life?

I find it incredible that you are asking these questions given you already have an engineering degree. You would know more about engineering and at least have a far better idea of civil eng than most lay people.

I'm going to make an educated guess and say civil engineers have an easier time looking for work than student actuaries. Actuaries add value to financial services and risk management, and sometimes statistical modelling, but nothing quite as solid as buildings and the environment. I'm sure there are more engineers than student actuaries in each graduating class, but very few people want to employ actuaries for their specific skillset or training. It is a lot easier to replace actuaries than engineers, and you don't need as many. The conversation will forever evolve around what actuaries or students can do outside of insurance, pensions, finance, and risk. Well, they may be smart or good with numbers and technical stuff, but who the hell knows what actuarial science is?

The market for entry level student actuaries is pretty bad everywhere you go. This is because schools and courses have bloomed in the past couple decades and supply far exceeds demand. It also takes very long for most people to pass the exams so they stay at analyst level quite some time (meaning an even bigger oversupply). Most people (at the entry level) find jobs via luck or connections (though most would hold the qualifications to merit the job).

I would say at least 3 papers are necessary for you to get a job..
Though, at the end of the day, I think attitude is more important. If you can show that you are hardworking and willing to learn, you'll have a higher chance of getting a job.
The reason I said 3 papers is because it would be quite difficult for you to get an interview with anything less. After obtaining an interview, attitude comes before results (at least in my opinion)

Thank you so much for your advice. Actually, I thought the same, engineering has a broader job market. The number of engineers in each specific fields, for instance civil or electrical, is almost 10 times as many as actuaries.

Thanks for your comments. I love math. I always scored excellent in math.

Is it really difficult to get Mechanical Engineering jobs in America? As far as I know, STEM graduates (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) are among the most sought after. If you are looking for jobs, find someone who’s working in your field and get to know them. Having a contact already at the firm is always better than cold-calling through the job boards.

Actuaries are required to have an understanding of the mathematical structure underlying insurance and financial security systems, and thus must have a strong background in discrete mathematics, applied statistics and business. Are you ready?

My areas of interest are calculus, geometry, trigonometry and to some degree linear algebra. To be honest, I'm not hundred percent sure about statistics and probability which actuarial math is mostly all about. Besides, I am not sure about the business and finance sides of it either. I took two econ courses this summer; although I managed to pass them with excellent marks, I did not like them at all. This have made me to think even more if actuarial math would be a good choice for me. In addition to all these, the job market is not as broad as the engineering job market. Am I right?

since your in canada, see if your uni has programs in financial engineering/quantitative finance?

ie developing pricing models for derivatives etc..

If you are interested in modeling , an actuarial degree does not really prepare you for real modeling work...

Example of standard literature:
"Managing Smile Risk" by Hagan et. al.

If this literature piques your interest ie understanding and then implementing it in a Object oriented language of your choice ie C++, then actuarial science is not enough..

a lot of actuaries are terrible at Maths (also see comment below). even actuaries will acknowledge that PDEs and SDEs are not natural to their thinking, rather that is the domain of physicists and mathematicians.

majority of actuaries will never use geometry, trigonometry, linear algebra in practice. there are exceptions to this. those who do investment modelling (rare) might use some matrix algebra in optimisation. some will do curve fitting in life insurance (survival models) and this would entail some heavy calculus. those in reinsurance (especially general reinsurance) might do heavy modelling, which means difficult equations and statistical software, and maybe stochastic models. but it must be stressed that most actuaries you will ever meet never come close to touching these, because insurance belongs to financial services, it is a business discipline. actuaries need formula to model reserves, liabilities, and to price risk, but for business reasons it cannot be the most complicated version every time. even the actual probability and stats used in practice is often simplified (how many actuaries use stochastic models which aren't automated or pre-programmed, and how much of the mathematical techniques learnt in school is ever used).

actuaries (in traditional practice) look at cashflows. then they consider factors which affect the size and timing and probability of occurence of the cashflows. you have some modern trends which are derivatives, energy, enterprise risk management, which are a bit different.

true that. majority of actuaries are not mathematicians, and most aren't even statisticians (don't count the lecturers and academics with their MScs and PhDs). some actuaries work as quants, i'm not completely sure how they managed to do it, i'm assuming they were very smart to begin with. there are some people who start with a Bachelor's in Act Sci and move on to an MQF or Comp Finance graduate degree.

someone asked me this so i'll answer here



actuarial is also $$ and figures. anyway, i wouldnt advise anyone to take CFA unless they had compelling reasons. I know a lot of people who understand what the CFA is about (and I think I do), but I still wouldnt recommend them to take it. In your case i think you have no idea of what the CFA truly is which is why it would be worse for you to do it

that said, the industry can be very superficial. what do i mean? let's say there's an oxford engineering grad or lse management grad. they might get interviews and even get the job, with some luck, without being the best fit or even genuinely interested in finance for what it is (outside of money). this totally depends on the interviewer and how good they are at assessing fit and aptitude, and to an extent how much they care about what type of talent they hire. they might not even know that much about finance (not really a big deal tho). their main edge was brand name. same for CFA, it might be a false signal which can help you land interviews, even though a large chunk of the finance industry (if you extend this to all financial markets activity, including banking) wont care about it much.

in actuarial, no one really cares what school you went to. can be Curtin, or some Asian uni. we even know (we being actuarial students and actuaries) that most of what you learnt in school never gets used (other than say Contingencies which is the core of life insurance, or Financial Maths which is the core of anything to do with actuaries, plus other specific examples) but we still like actuarial graduates because they tend to have been tested hard while at school with some very silly exams. also compared to a Maths or Econ grad they would be further ahead with their exams, which is advantageous for consultants, and also beneficial for direct companies because less resources are spent on education and study

Im not sorry and I have to say this.
Actuarial Science is not your field even if you are very bright.
It's for the one that truly understands and appreciates the existence of this profession.
Unless you have been through in either insurance industry, accounting industry and financial industry.
I would just want to ask, how much do you know about actuarial studies?
No idea? Ok please don't ever think about it.

Just for your information, I have been thinking to take a degree in actuarial science for 6 years back in junior 3(form 3) (oh my god, how pro I can be when Im finally an actuary??!) but ended up in an accounting and finance degree, for which later on I will definitely take CFA professional exams.

Whoever choosing between actuarial science and finance, please make sure that you are well aware of what they are doing in that industry.

Be prepared for the hardship that is coming to you, whether you choose any of them. You are going to suffer not only for the time during the studies but also after that.

I have realised that a lot of people are now going into financial studies for which they think they can 'handle it'. Good for them to regret one day.

Let's just hope that you can mentally believe in it before you physically start it.

Don't listen to people that only talks about salaries. It's totally bullshit. End of story.

since we're not only talking about actuaries, but finance more broadly, this is relevant.

this is a sticky point. there are some people who come from actuarial backgrounds (studied actuarial science, even worked for insurance companies) that are making loads of bank... I'm talking retire rich at 30-40. Think hedge funds, prop traders, investment bankers, some partners in consulting firms, certain brokers. they may not all work as actuaries but they all started from that same place. it is due to the uniqueness of their business, and the fact they make money off commissions and fees rather than products. to make money off products you need to be exceptional (Apple iPhone) but commissions are easy when the service you provide is not easily replaceable.

which brings us to insurance. sounds very much like investment banking, prop trading, hedge funds. the operators must bear huge financial risk (although this is of course mitigated or limited by reinsurance and derivatives). the ability to supply capital is not their value driver or business model, because any rich investor or cash rich company can play that role - even a government or pension fund. it is their appetite for risk which is their main source of value. so why aren't insurance actuaries all rich, if insurance companies can generate so much economic value in theory...? many reasons. structurally the industry relies heavily on financial advisers who take huge cuts, leaving little for the rest. insurance companies face huge capital requirements so they are usually public owned (listed) or a subsidiary of a listed company - at least the major ones are these days. which means the company works to produce returns for shareholders, whereas in a small advisory practice or fund the workers are also owners and they can keep a lot more money. insurance also has a deeper purpose, and that is to pay claims so that people can get on with their lives and businesses can survive hazardous events, even as a for-profit company (hedge funds, traders etc exist only to make money for themselves or their customers, and take a fee in the process, although those who have a role as investors do facilitate the financial markets)

Just graduated from UKM with Actuarial Science degree and honestly, I wish I studied WAY harder for the professional exams. I only managed to pass 2 before I graduated and I'm worried that I won't have as much time to study once I find work. I just know that the 4 Dean's List students that passed 4/5 exams instantly got work in Actuarial department after graduation. As someone said above, these exams are important for employers to even LOOK at your resume. Right now, my alternative is banking but I wish I could penetrate insurance industry somehow... Guess I'll have to keep studying.

I don't regret getting into Actuarial Science (I don't have excellent results but I love this field of maths and how you have to use these numbers to make decisions in economy, explain in layman's terms and stuff) but I just wish people would stop hyping this course as "SURE HIGH PAY, SURE GET JOB ONE"! But there are definitely possibilities for actuarial students if they can't get into actuarial department. I heard that since actuarial students are known for being smart (high requirements to get into degree and stuff), you can also try investment or banking or risk management.

Allow me to estimate how many local actuarial graduates we have every years
UM : 40
UKM : 40
UTAR : 120
UCSI : 50
UITM : 50
USIM : 50
Total : 350

at least 350 local actuarial graduates for this year and this number is increasing every year! More local uni are offering actuarial science courses, e.g. Sunway, and I heard there is like over 50+ student in the latest batch. I think that more local uni like MMU taylor going to start offering this course in the near future (since more actuarial graduates = more actuarial lecturers available in the future!).

if you ask people in oversea uni which offer actuarial course (eg Southampton/Drake/Waterloo/Cass), they would say most of the Malaysians there study Actuarial Sciences. If you tell random aunty/uncles that you studying actuarial science, their response would be "OH my nephew/niece/relative also studies that in XXX country, you guys are going to be RICH!". So add another 300 oversea actuarial grads to my figure above (sorry im not familiar with oversea uni, so just make a rough estimate), which would sum up to at least 650 actuarial grads.

According to BNM, we have roughly 50 insurance companies (life/general conventional, life/general takaful, general/life reinsurance, general/life retakaful) and about 5 consulting companies offering actuarial services. Assuming each company takes 2~3 fresh graduates each year, 2.5*55 = 137.5 fresh actuarial openings each year, which is actually MUCH HIGHER than the actual number, 137.5/650 = 21%, at most 21% of actuarial graduates can get an actuarial job, while most of the rest end up in banks or non-actuarial positions in insurance companies.

Feel free to correct my estimates above if you have better/more credible figure.

So it would be fair to say at most 1 out of 5 graduates can get actuarial job, which is certainly not an easy task! For my batch in UKM, only 8 out of 45 students get actuarial job, roughly 18%. I believe the percentage would be much lower for private uni as they take a lot of students.

So, think again before you take actuarial sciences, dont believe whatever BS said in the media/newspaper - "actuarial fresh graduate are highly demanded blah blah blah". that maybe happen in developed country like US but certainly not in Malaysia.

I think we should do a survey to see how many percentage of students can actually get into actuarial field for each uni