By a Financial Risk Manager (FRM) Candidate
When I finally hit the "Submit" button on the GARP website after Part 2, a wave of exhaustion washed over me—not just from the four-hour exam, but from the nearly two-year marathon that preceded it. When the results came in, I saw the quartiles: Part 1 scores of 1,1,2,2 and Part 2 scores of 2,2,1,1,1,1. At first glance, they aren't the perfect "1,1,1,1" scores that get plastered all over LinkedIn. But looking at them, I felt immense pride. They represented a realistic, human journey. They represented a strategy of precision, a schedule of discipline, and a deep understanding that passing the FRM isn't about genius; it's about endurance and smart work.
If you are reading this, you are likely contemplating the same journey. You are staring at the Schweser notes or the GARP books, feeling overwhelmed by the sheer volume of information. You are wondering how to balance this with a 40-hour work week, a family, or just a life.
Let me break down exactly what I did, what I used, and how I navigated the FRM labyrinth.
Before diving into materials and time, we need to understand the two distinct personalities of the FRM exam.
Part 1 is foundational. It is the "toolbox." It focuses on the tools you use to manage risk. My scores (1,1,2,2) meant I absolutely crushed the quantitative foundations and financial markets, while I did well in valuation and risk models. This is often the "math-heavy" part. It rewards calculation speed and a solid grasp of stats.
Part 2 is applied. It is the "architecture." It focuses on how you apply those tools in the real world. My scores (2,2,1,1,1,1) showed a deep strength in Market Risk, Credit Risk, Operational Risk, and Liquidity Risk, while being competent in Risk Management and Investment Management. Part 2 is about reading, interpretation, and understanding the nuances of Basel regulations and scenario analysis.
There is a saying among candidates: "Part 1 is hard to understand, but the exam is straightforward. Part 2 is easier to understand, but the exam is brutal." I found that to be entirely true.
I am a big believer in the "80/20" rule. You can get 80% of the value from 20% of the source material. GARP recommends thousands of pages of reading. I did not read the GARP books cover to cover. If you have the time, go for it. But for a working professional, it’s a death sentence.
Here is exactly what I used and how I used it.
1. Schweser Notes (Core Text):
This was my bible. For both Part 1 and Part 2, I used the Kaplan Schweser study notes exclusively as my primary reading source.
How I used them: I read them like a novel. I didn't highlight everything. I focused on the "Cross-Reference" sections that tied the content back to GARP readings. I wrote notes in the margins. More importantly, I made a point to read the "Quick Summary" at the end of each chapter before reading the chapter. This gave me a roadmap of where I was going.
Verdict: Essential for Part 1 calculations; good for Part 2 concepts.
2. GARP Official Practice Exams:
This is non-negotiable. If you only buy one thing besides the basic notes, buy the GARP mock exams.
How I used them: As a diagnostic tool. I did not "save" the official exams for the last week. I did them a month out. I flagged every question I got wrong or guessed on. I then went back to the GARP curriculum specifically to look up those flagged topics.
Verdict: Invaluable. The Schweser questions are good, but they are often easier or more "clean." The GARP questions are messy, ambiguous, and force you to think. They are the secret sauce.
3. AnalystPrep Q-Bank (For Part 1) and Bionic Turtle (For Part 2):
For Part 1, I used AnalystPrep heavily for grinding quant questions. It helped me get my speed up. The exam is 100 questions in 4 hours—you need to be fast.
For Part 2, I used Bionic Turtle (BT) for the "deep dive." BT questions are notoriously harder than the exam. They punish you if you don't understand the why behind the formula. Getting 40% on a BT quiz was common, but it forced me to look up definitions and logic.
4. YouTube (The Forgotten Hero):
When I read "Gaussian Copula" or "Vasicek Model" and my eyes glazed over, I went to YouTube. Watching a 10-minute animated video explaining the concept was often more valuable than 2 hours of reading. Visual learning is critical for abstract risk concepts.
There is a trap that many FRM candidates fall into: reading the notes, nodding along, and thinking, "I understand this." You don't. Understanding is passive; application is active.
I divided my study into three distinct phases.
Phase 1: The "Weed-Out" (Read & Conceptualize)
I started 5 months before the exam.
My goal here was not to memorize. It was to simply get through the material.
I aimed for one book per week for Part 1, and slightly more for Part 2.
I made "Cheat Sheets" for every topic. Not detailed notes, but a single page summarizing the formulas for that topic (e.g., one page for VaR, one page for Options Strategies).
Crucial Rule: If I didn't understand something, I didn't spend more than 20 minutes trying to solve it. I moved on and flagged it. You can't get stuck on the first mountain; you need to see the whole landscape.
Phase 2: The "Grind" (Practice & Application)
This started 2 months out.
This is where the grind really begins. I would read a chapter in the morning, then do 20-30 questions on that chapter at night.
For Part 1, this meant practicing calculations until I could do them in my sleep. Binomial trees, Black-Scholes, Duration, Convexity—I practiced them until my calculator (the TI BA II Plus) became an extension of my hand.
For Part 2, this meant reading case studies and trying to summarize them in one sentence. "What is the moral of the Barings Bank collapse?" or "Why did the Liquidity Black Hole happen?"
Phase 3: The "Marathon" (Mocks & Revision)
This was the final 3 weeks.
I took 5 mock exams total for each part. On weekends, I simulated the exam environment: 4 hours, no phone, no music, strict time.
After each mock, I spent more time reviewing than taking the exam. I created a "Mistake Log" – a spreadsheet listing every question I got wrong, the concept, and the correct reasoning.
By the week of the exam, I wasn't learning new things; I was only reviewing my Mistake Log and my Cheat Sheets.
Let’s cut to the chase. How many hours does it take? GARP recommends 240 hours per part. I tracked my time religiously using the app "Forest." Here is the reality.
Total Actual Study Time:
FRM Part 1: ~210 hours (Spent over 5 months)
FRM Part 2: ~250 hours (Spent over 6 months)
Wait, that’s lower than the GARP recommendation for Part 1 and slightly higher for Part 2. Why the discrepancy?
The Breakdown:
Weeknights (Mon-Fri): 1.5 hours per night on average. This didn't mean I studied every weeknight. If I had a late meeting or was exhausted, I skipped it. But generally, I would study from 9:30 PM to 11:00 PM.
Weekends (Sat-Sun): 5-6 hours total (usually 3 hours on Saturday morning, 3 hours on Sunday morning).
The "Off" Weeks: There were times I didn't study for a week because of work deadlines. I didn't panic. I just adjusted my schedule.
The Key Insight: Consistency beats intensity. Studying 3 hours on a Sunday is better than 8 hours, which leads to burnout. I prioritized sleep. I can guarantee you that I slept 8 hours a night during my preparation. Your brain consolidates memory during sleep. Skimping on sleep to cram is a losing strategy.
I want to address the elephant in the room: the quartiles.
Part 1 (1,1,2,2): The "1s" were in the Quantitative Analysis and Financial Markets. Why? Because I practiced the math obsessively. The "2s" were in Valuation and Risk Models. Why? Because those questions are more conceptual and require a deeper understanding of model assumptions.
Part 2 (2,2,1,1,1,1): The "2s" were in Risk Management and Investment Management. These topics are the "softer" side of the exam—more qualitative, more judgment-based. The "1s" were in the big three: Market, Credit, and Operational Risk. This is because Part 2 heavily focuses on current issues, Basel, and stress testing.
The Hard Truth: Passing the FRM is not about getting all 1s. It is about total aggregate score. You don't need to be perfect. You just need to be better than the bottom half of test-takers. If you look at my scores, I made sure I dominated the heavy-weight topics (Market, Credit, Ops) and did "good enough" on the lighter ones.
Don't Fear the Calculator: For Part 1, you need to know the TI BA II Plus inside and out. I can't count how many times I saw candidates fumbling with their calculators trying to find the "Data" button for standard deviation. Know your calculator.
Formulas vs. Intuition: For Part 1, memorize the formula. For Part 2, forget the formula. Part 2 doesn't test the calculation of GARCH; it tests why GARCH is better than EWMA. It tests the assumptions behind the model. If you try to memorize formulas for Part 2, you are wasting time.
The "Current Issues" Section: This is a free 10-15 points in Part 2. It's the only section where you can guarantee you will know the answers if you read the GARP reading. I read the GARP "Current Issues" article three times.
Sleep is Strategy: I cannot stress this enough. The night before the exam, do not study. Do not look at notes. You will not learn anything new in 12 hours. Eat a good meal, go for a walk, and go to bed early. I woke up on exam day feeling sharp and calm.
When you pass, you get a certificate. When you update your LinkedIn, you get the "FRM" designation. That's cool.
But the actual value of the FRM is the process. I now read financial news differently. When I read about a bank failing, I immediately think about liquidity risk and capital ratios. When I see interest rate changes, I think about duration and convexity. The FRM doesn't just give you a title; it rewires your brain to think like a risk manager.
The path is long. It’s dark sometimes. There were many nights I sat staring at the page, wanting to give up and just watch Netflix. The fear of failing is real.
But if you break it down—a little bit every day, consistency over intensity, and practice over passive reading—you can do it.
My scores weren't perfect, but they were enough. They represent a human who balanced work, life, and study. If you are starting this journey, take a deep breath. Trust the process, trust the materials, and trust yourself. See you on the other side.