Actuarial Science

The course is great but there are a few things to be aware of
1. You actually take 5 subjects not 8 and it would be very very difficult to take 8 subjects-some take six subjects but most take five. If you have a good stats background, it's easier to take 6 subjects.
2. You are not guaranteed exemptions at all and people have graduated with none or only 1 or 2 exemptions and they don't just let you pass either. The exemption mark is not the pass mark but rather something like a high 2.1 and this is subject to change annually.
3. If you have not done stats before, you will have a harder time as you are put into 2nd, third and fourth year stats courses immediately. You will pick it up if you put the hard work in though.

You do cover the courses from the institute and the work load is very intensive. If you have a good stats background, it will definately be easier.

Studying for the institute takes a very long time if you have no exemptions and it's harder studying on your own. It is significantly cheaper though but I think it takes a lot longer to go study a subject this way. Most people I know that have gone down this route have said that if they could start again, they would definately do a course like this.
You could try taking CT1 from the institute on your own as you don't have to be a member to take this subject and it's a good way of knowing if you like actuarial science.

Another thing to think of is, getting a trainee position with no exemptions has gotten harder as you are competing with people who have a max of nine.

Have you looked at www.actuaries.org.uk and www.acted.co.uk ?

Also, if you are working part time I would guess that you could possibly take three subjects max at a time. The institute suggests around 150-200 hours per CT but I reckon to be sure of a pass it takes a bit more work than that.

Sorry this reply is very long! In short, I've done both and would recommend the diploma and think it's worth the money. I would recommend that you look at the above websites though to help you make a choice. The discussion forum on the acted website is very help.

Hope that helps

paulo6891 wrote: »

It is interesting what you said about doing CT1 and seeing how I feel about it. Would that exam give you a good overall feeling for the profession and the type of work that one would be carrying out?

No it won't. CT1 is actually one of the easier subjects. It also doesn't really give you any inclination to what you'd be actually doing while working...

As others have said, doing the course does not guarantee you any exemptions. You definitely won't be doing 8 subjects, it's impossible really to do 8 in the 9 months of that course. You can't just get the 40% pass mark and get an exemption - usually you need to get around 70% for an exemption.

Regarding if it's easier to do them yourself or through the course, I think you'd have difficulty doing them yourself, especially to get 5 or 6 CTs over 2 exam sittings when you have no experience of doing the exams already. If you decided to do them yourself, then I really don't think you'd have the time to have a part-time job either. I think doing the course would be the best bet.

I've just finished the CTs and I did them all through the profession. I wish I had known about the Diploma as it is quicker route to qualifications. This is mainly because the UCD exams are less difficult than the profession exams. I would recommend doing CT3,4,5,6 and 8 and doing the the rest once you start working or even before you start the Diploma. CT1,2 and 7 (expecially 7) are much less difficult than the rest.

I would also recommend General insurance over Life as a choice of career. I moved from Life to General recently and I have no regrets.

Best of luck in your studies.

^^ Completely disagree with you both! I guess it depends though which area of Life that you both worked in previously.

pcaca wrote: »

I'm considering doing exactly what pythia has described and applying for an actuary training scheme. I've been working as an engineer for the past 4 years and I'm trying to get into the financial services sector. What advise would you give me in trying to make this change possible? What company's do these actuary training schemes?

have you a primary degree? if so look into the postgrad actuarial course in UCD

you're still better to do the course, its easier to get a role and you'd earn a higher salary

I would look into doing CT1 as a non-member. Also, see if you are eligible for any exemptions, this could help. You should think about talking to a recruiter, for example from Acumen who are a big actuarial recruiter. They may be able to give you some help.

Most life and general insurers have a study scheme. Some only have a very small handful of people studying (like my firm which only has 3 people) and some have a very big one (like my old company).

There are also a lot more jobs in the UK from what I can see, maybe you would consider there too...

sjc05 wrote: »

I am trying to decide whether to go back and do the Hdip in UCD or try and get in as a trainee somewhere. To make it worthwhile to do the Hdip you would need to get all 8 exemptions which seems a big ask (does anyone know what kind of percent you would need to average to get all 8). I have no exemptions at the minute but have a good maths backround (B.Sc in Maths). From talking to a few people in the profession it is getting rarer and rarer for firms to take on trainees with no exemptions (regardless of backround). I have a few interviews coming up (including a few in UK) and can't decide which is the best option. All comments welcome.

if it were me, i'd still do the ucd hdip

Sorry to bump an old thread but i've just a few questions and would be grateful for any advice/thoughts. I'm currently doing an accounting degree along with economics and finance subjects. The maths obviously wouldn't come close to that of any actuarial degree.
Would I stand any chance of getting into the higher diploma in UCD, or does anyone have any experience of someone who did an accounting/commerce degree doing it.
Would I get any professional exemptions as I know there's one module on Financial Reporting and an other on Intermediate Economics, both of which I've covered.
Also, I didn't concentrate on Maths at LC for very naive reasons. Would it be worth repeating, I'd be confident of a high B or an A at least with a bit of work.

Thanks in advance for any feedback.

misslt wrote: »

Where are you doing your degree? You may be exempt from the accounting exam (CT2 I believe) and CT7, the economics exam. Some universities are accredited with the institute for certain subjects/modules, the list is on the professions website.

I have no experience with the Hdip, but I'm currently doing the BAFS degree programme in UCD - so I wouldn't know if you'd be able to get in.

To be honest when it comes to exemption subjects in UCD it's more statistics than Maths, so far anyway - I'm going into my final year in September. Having said that, you will need to be familiar with a fair amount of mathematical stuff such as integration, differentiation, things like that.

Take a look at the professions website, www.actuaries.org.uk at the syllabus(es?) for each subject.

CT1 is financial mathematics and it's available to sit as a non-member, as someone said above. In my experience so far that's the most 'Maths-y' subject, the rest is statistics.

hope this helps somewhat, sorry I don't know any more

Cheers for that misslt. Loads of info there. Does the course contain many 'business-y' modules as I've seen something on communications- not sure what would be in that. I think I'd be better off emailing directly to see where I stand. Thanks again

paulo6891 wrote: »

Hi,

Just to revisit this thread, it looks like I am going to go through with these exams. Unfortunately CT1 is the only exam that I can do next spring (was hoping to do 1 or 2 more, but cant as I'm a non member).

Does anyone know what exactly is the difference between the graduate diploma in actuarial sciences and the MSc in Actuarial sciences, both from UCD?

Both seem to have the same entry requirements, it's 1k more for the MSc although there would possibly be more gravitas in having that on the cv.

Did you actually read the descriptions? You can see that this part is clearly different in the Masters:

In semester 3 you will undertake independent research in an area of actuarial science under the supervision of a member of the School of Mathematical Sciences with the aim of submitting a thesis on your research findings at the end of the semester. Depending on your subject choices in semesters 1 and 2 you may also undertake advanced modules in finance at the UCD Smurfit School of Business – the modules offered will vary from year to year but possible topics may include regulation, corporate governance, ethics in finance, asset valuation, and financial management.

Personally I would do the diploma. I don't see how a masters is more valuable if you are sure you want to become an actuary. I don't think my own company would pay you more, for example, because you have a masters not a dip.

If you think you might want do something else afterwards, then the masters might be better. If it's literally just to get exemptions then do the dip.

paulo6891 wrote: »

Calm down there Pythia, I did read the description and the part that you quoted but did not understand it. That is why I asked. I did not know if the thesis etc meant that you have to do less exams etc. Or if you have to do the same exams in both, what is the extra benefit of the masters. Also, I know that people who do the diploma usually don't get all of their exemptions, I imagine that's because they either don't pass all the exams or that they decide to take less modules. If you get the masters degree, do you automatically get all of the exemptions or does it depend on how you do in different aspects of the program? Things like that. I was on the site and saw all of that info that you quoted, so I think it's a little unfair to imply laziness on my part. I just thought that someone here may know, I have sent an email and am awaiting a reply but since people have previously been very helpful on this thread, I thought I'd give it a shot.

I personally think that a masters would look better on a cv than the diploma, but that's just me.

Maybe worth looking into whether or not the thesis/dissertation would exempt you from an ST. There is an ST0