FINS1612 vs FINS1613 (1 Viewer)

[albertcamus]

Hey everyone,

I'm currently doing FINS1613 as of Semester 1, and find the content to be somewhat challenging (due to the understanding involved in deciphering many of the questions) but very interesting too.

How would FINS1612 in Semester 2 compare to this? Is it as quantitative? Is it more 'difficult'? How's the marking/final exam/lecturers etc.

Cheers.

 

[seremify007]

1613 was considerably harder than 1612 to me. 1612 is very qualitative and theory focused with minimal calculations whereas 1613 had both more complex theoretical concepts and a need to do calculations. IMO 1613 and 2624 were the hardest of the mandatory finance subjects but then I'm rubbish at quantitative. 1612 was like an introduction to theoretical finance concepts and designed to touch on pretty much all aspects of finance. Homework and exams felt like HSC- ie reading and then answering questions - comprehension style.

 

[itoki2288]

I'm doing 1612 and 1613 next semester. They weren't prerequisites for each other or anything so I figured they were separate enough courses to be done at the same time.

 

[Shadowdude]

FINS1612 is more wordy than mathsy

 

[aphorae]

1613 is a lot easier in Semester 1 (vs. course in Semester 2), so it's possible you'd find 1612 harder? I did it in S2 2013. Quiz 1 was easy, and I think usually either quiz 2 or the final is hard (the other one being okay)...so don't get complacent if you do really well in the first quiz haha. It's more qualitative than 1613, but I remember there being a surprising amount of calculations in one of the quizzes.

@seremify They made 2624 easier (and 3616 harder, which balances it out I suppose) in the last couple of years. Midsem average is borderline P/C, but we get 25%+ free marks now from homework/online quizzes/etc. (unlimited time, 3 attempts). ~40% of the exam is theory. At least half our exam room left over an hour early.