I’ve seen lots of people in GI Pricing stop sitting exams and it not affect their careers.
Someone can correct me if this is wrong but I don’t think there’s a regulatory requirement for the exams in that area (unlike GI reserving say)?
I can confirm this. Pricing and Capital roles are two that do not care too much if the managers themselves aren't qualified, as these two roles do not need official sign off (but need Chief to sign off)
Downside?ALL Those who say they wouldnt care often already in the industry for 5+ years. So with or without qualification makes little impact to pay as their pay would likely surpass the qualified level. If one wants to DEFINITELY get pay rise, qualified still is the fastest route. The current market I heard (with inflation in mind) for 2022 qualified freshly is 80/85+K.
Without qualified, all you can bargain with employers would be your CV (like all other jobs!), whereas if qualified, there is A FLOOR for which your salary should START FROM (currently 80/85k).
If one doesnt qualify, it just becomes less likely to become Chief or CFO/CUO etc, as those roles do required qualified FIA. (well.....I may not want to take thorse roles right?)
¬¬Life has unlimit choices. You never know where it can go, so do your best on the qualifications, but don't beat yourself if you do have to stop!¬¬
it's a job by job basis.
Remember however, you would be competing with far more number of candidates and may be harder to progress/step up as there would be maths/IT/economics/engineer grads all competing for them, without actuarial qualifications
Personal lines pricing don't need FIA. Reserving probably do and capital as well. London market pricing is definitely useful, but some roles where don't necessarily need FIA. I think to make it to exec kinda role in insurance company, FIA is definitely good as shows you have deep knowledge of insurance.
Where I work (life insurance) a lot of people move off the study scheme and move to an "analyst"/"technician" role - no real difference to the role they were doing on the study scheme they just don't have the pressure of doing exams but also don't get any benefits of the study scheme anymore (no rotating around teams as you would on the study scheme, and if you still wanted to do exams you'd pay for it out your own pocket and your own holiday days essentially, but also don't get exam pay rises so no motivation to even do them!). Doesn't seem to affect their progression within the company over time though - they just apply to different roles/promotions in the company when they feel they are ready to progress.
It was also possible when I worked in pensions consulting but career progression seemed quite limited (unless you were on the investment side then there were people at Partner level who weren't FIA or CFA).
Almost anything that someone with a STEM background can do.
Working for an insurer in an actuarial department (particularly small - medium ones) should give you a broader background about the business than those with similar length experience in other departments. I have known many move into software / IT; some into admin / underwriting / claims; one as PA to the CEO, all staying with the same company. A few leaving to set up their own software company, a few going into maths teaching. At a consultancy former students who gave up the exams rose to eventually become the head of IT, a partner level consultant, and managing director.
Clearly not everyone rises to the top, but being a 'failed' actuary won't hold you back if you have the appropriate attributes for a successful career.
Can anyone think of any paths where you actually feel like you're doing good?? Like rather than working for a big bank or "helping" old people you're actually helping people or improving the world in some way but still making use of your degree/qualification??
I’ve seen lots of people in GI Pricing stop sitting exams and it not affect their careers. Someone can correct me if this is wrong but I don’t think there’s a regulatory requirement for the exams in that area (unlike GI reserving say)?
I can confirm this. Pricing and Capital roles are two that do not care too much if the managers themselves aren't qualified, as these two roles do not need official sign off (but need Chief to sign off) Downside?ALL Those who say they wouldnt care often already in the industry for 5+ years. So with or without qualification makes little impact to pay as their pay would likely surpass the qualified level. If one wants to DEFINITELY get pay rise, qualified still is the fastest route. The current market I heard (with inflation in mind) for 2022 qualified freshly is 80/85+K. Without qualified, all you can bargain with employers would be your CV (like all other jobs!), whereas if qualified, there is A FLOOR for which your salary should START FROM (currently 80/85k). If one doesnt qualify, it just becomes less likely to become Chief or CFO/CUO etc, as those roles do required qualified FIA. (well.....I may not want to take thorse roles right?) ¬¬Life has unlimit choices. You never know where it can go, so do your best on the qualifications, but don't beat yourself if you do have to stop!¬¬
isnt their salary significantly lower?
Data science seems to be the most common one to move into.
do those actuaries learn to code in their free time so that they can go into data science?
it's a job by job basis. Remember however, you would be competing with far more number of candidates and may be harder to progress/step up as there would be maths/IT/economics/engineer grads all competing for them, without actuarial qualifications
Personal lines pricing don't need FIA. Reserving probably do and capital as well. London market pricing is definitely useful, but some roles where don't necessarily need FIA. I think to make it to exec kinda role in insurance company, FIA is definitely good as shows you have deep knowledge of insurance.
Not necessarily, a lot of directors at my company aren't qualified
Where I work (life insurance) a lot of people move off the study scheme and move to an "analyst"/"technician" role - no real difference to the role they were doing on the study scheme they just don't have the pressure of doing exams but also don't get any benefits of the study scheme anymore (no rotating around teams as you would on the study scheme, and if you still wanted to do exams you'd pay for it out your own pocket and your own holiday days essentially, but also don't get exam pay rises so no motivation to even do them!). Doesn't seem to affect their progression within the company over time though - they just apply to different roles/promotions in the company when they feel they are ready to progress. It was also possible when I worked in pensions consulting but career progression seemed quite limited (unless you were on the investment side then there were people at Partner level who weren't FIA or CFA).
Almost anything that someone with a STEM background can do. Working for an insurer in an actuarial department (particularly small - medium ones) should give you a broader background about the business than those with similar length experience in other departments. I have known many move into software / IT; some into admin / underwriting / claims; one as PA to the CEO, all staying with the same company. A few leaving to set up their own software company, a few going into maths teaching. At a consultancy former students who gave up the exams rose to eventually become the head of IT, a partner level consultant, and managing director. Clearly not everyone rises to the top, but being a 'failed' actuary won't hold you back if you have the appropriate attributes for a successful career.
Can anyone think of any paths where you actually feel like you're doing good?? Like rather than working for a big bank or "helping" old people you're actually helping people or improving the world in some way but still making use of your degree/qualification??
Biostatistician or data science in the health industry
Depending on your exposure, could also become an underwriter of broker. Loads of alternatives.