关键是好不好考啊，难度肿么样。。。

建议考PRM

谁知道frm有效期多久啊？万一拷出来之后没去金融行业工作是不是没几年成绩就作废了？

哎 很纠结

国内有PRM的培训机构么？

跟GARP打过交道之后对其工作效率和服务态度深恶痛绝！

5年之内要提交工作证明

两个都考就不用纠结了。

上周末，又有同学在风险管理实务YY直播课上问FRM证书好还是PRM证书好。我当时的回答是，理论上两者没有什么强弱之分，或者说我也分不出个强弱，大概就是传说PRM的数学更难一些；从工作实践来说，因为FRM进入中国市场的时间早很多，所以各金融机构的认可度要强于PRM。

回头想想，其实在纠结哪个证书好的时候，按佛家说法就是“着相”了。证书是可以提高就业成功率，但是同学们应该避免一个误区：有了好证书就有了心仪的工作！

求职和相亲有很多相似的地方，比如：你看上的对象看不上你，看上你的对象你又看不上；心仪的对象有数不尽的竞争者，门槛也高；招聘单位的人事部就好似未来丈母娘，左看右看，总也觉得你配不上她“女儿”。。。。。。

从求职来说，越是一般的单位，对证书越是看重，因为人才的缺乏，能有一点点加分都会让人事部门感到渴望。然而反过来说，这样的单位也不会是同学们心仪的对象。至于同学们心仪的那些“白富美”单位，HOHO，门槛可不低，通常来说会综合看：背景、学历（高大上学府）、证书（FRM、PRM、CFA、CVA、CPA等等）、外语、从业经验、各项技能、人品、工作态度、职业发展、家庭/恋爱状况、薪资诉求等等。看看这一大堆要求，你是不是瞬间明白了，你手拿证书，也不会换来人事部门的高看一眼。你要是还傻傻的看不清形势，那我再告诉你一件事情，在某知名券商风险管理部门，FRM证书的拥有者几乎为100%（因为有位博士同学，我没好意思问人家有证书不），至于为啥都是FRM证书？这个简单，大家都是早年间考的，那时候还没有PRM。当然还有同学是FRM与CFA双证。

所以说：对于心仪的单位来说，证书只是基础，关键是全面提升自身能力。同学们哪，形势严峻，没有时间慢慢考虑考这个证书还是那个证书，FRM或PRM，先考一个出来再说，越是好单位，越是能看懂这些证书的含金量。除了证书，还有漫漫长路在等着你们，让我慢慢道来：

按传统的分类方法，风险管理分为项目风险管理和投资组合风险管理。对于项目风险管理来说，在风险管理基础之上还需要财务、法律相关专业技能，也就是说，在项目风险管理岗位上，你能再拿出CPA的证书或者财务/审计、法律相关工作经历，那肯定是很加分的；对于投资组合风险管理来说，在风险管理基础之上还需要统计、量化以及投资组合相关专业知识，也就是说，在投资组合风险管理岗位上，你能拿出CFA的证书或者统计软件、建模能力的证明，那肯定是很加分的。

按现在主流的分类方法，风险管理分为市场、信用、操作、流动性等风险管理团队/岗位。市场风险，类似之前的投资组合风险管理，注重量化、建模能力；信用风险，需要分析财务报表的能力；操作风险，额~~~貌似没太多追加需求；流动性风险，需要分析财务报表及金融市场流动性分析，这里分析的财务报表与信用风险有区别，第一流动性主要是看自己公司，信用是看别人公司，第二流动性主要看资金和金融产品、负债等，信用要看偿债能力、盈利能力等。

总的来说，各家单位根据自身情况会提出不同需求，但是没有一家单位会：在你“啪”拍出一张证书后，就抱着你大腿说，来吧，亲爹，来我们单位工作吧，求您了。喂，醒醒，越是心仪的“白富美”单位，要求越多，同学们，要全面提升自身能力，才会更有竞争力！

学习风险管理实务免费课程

PRM VS. FRM – WHY I CHOSE PRM
As you might now, I am undergoing the CFA examination.
CFA gives you an incredible indepth transversal knowledge of the finance area and I am grateful for that. In the mean time, I’m quite a techie guy => looking for advanced quantitative stuff as well. I strongly believe an advanced quantitative education is a strong complement to CFA designation.
Being interested by growing area of risk management, I had a look at possible credible designation available on the market.
Naturally I stumbled upon FRM for Financial Risk Manager (http://www.garp.com/frmexam/ from GARP). After digging a little bit, I found that another designation existed with advanced quantitative content and quite recognized in the investment community too : PRM for Professional Risk Manager (http://www.prmia.org).
PRM vs. FRM
How to make a choice? Well that was the hard part! (for the name, I prefer FRM since it accounts for ‘financial’ focus of risk management in its name)
My first approach was quite straightforward. I went to a financial-jobs internet website (http://www.efinancialcareers.com) and I searched for jobs with first ‘frm’ as keyword and then ‘prm’ as keyword. Result of this test was cristal clear: 22 answers for FRM vs. 3 for PRM. => my choice went to FRM.
Full of doubts and uncertainties, I decided to give it another go on two other financial-jobs websites and here results were more mixed. FRM still had the hedge, but in fact lots of job offers contained FRM as an acronym for their own business units and not for the FRM certification. In fact, when clear reference to FRM certification was made, PRM was quoted too (almost always). => back to the beginning: which one to choose…?
Below are misc elements that helped me take a decision:
pro PRM:
•        supposedly a bit more quantitative than FRM (I’m looking for this quantitative aspect)
•        less costly (exam prices are lower, no annual membership fee – for now)
•        clearer self-study line (single handbook covering all exams vs. a handbook + core-readings for FRM with visibly only core-readings as important (=> why having a dedicated handbook if it does not exactly cover the exam content) & having an accumulated list of different readings (what core-readings consist of) does not look like a smooth & effective way to learn for me)
•        greater flexibility: 4 exams that you can pass in any order at any business day (with restriction though to pass them within 2 years) vs. 2 exams that you can pass only twice a year in specific locations
•        backed by top-tier one universities: Columbia University, Duke University, Bocconi School, HEC, Hong-Kong University, National University of Singapore, Trinity College… (full list: http://prmia.org/index.php?page=aboutus&option=universitypartners)
pro FRM:
•        still the hedge in job offer (though only slightly in the end)
•        work experience required (I find it important, you hardly can be a professional without relevant work experience)
•        older than PRM (1997 vs. 2002) => more recognized
•        17k graduates to date (I did not manage to find the number of PRM graduates, I only found the number of members which is not representative) => huge pool of potential colleagues, who do know about the PRM program
•        article on wallstreetjournal, stating a huge increase in the number of applicants (+80% in 2009 with 23k candidates!!!!) (article: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703278604574624513398904666.html)
conclusion: the wsj article definitely identified FRM as the train to take for me. Its pool of participants is increasing at high speed leaving out competition (unfortunately I did not find similar stats for PRM, it’s too bad) => I wanted to go for FRM (despite all these advantages that PRM has! incl. free-membership)
not-for-profit
I was about to register for FRM exam when I read an article on the GARP scandal (http://www.riskglossary.com/link/garp_scandal.htm andhttp://www.riskglossary.com/papers/garp_letter.htm). Basically the short story is that at first, only GARP (and its FRM certification) existed. But at some point they started to make real-money out of it. So they decided to change the status of the company from a not-for-profit organization to a regular for-profit organization. Some people working at GARP felt betrayed and decided to create a real not-for-profit organization managing risk-management profesionnals: PRMIA and its PRM certification.
Well, it might look stupid, but this was decisive in making my choice. I mean cfa is a not-for-profit organization, all universities/high-schools I know are not-for-profit organization. Why? At some point, when you’re in the knowledge business, I find it not appropriate to have as goal profit-maximization. It is not the way it’s done in the other places => why should it be the case here? To me this is not ethically appropriate and GARP has not the best focus in mind.
It’s a bit the same awkwardness that existed when auditing firms where consulting firms to the same clients as well. At some point you have a conflict of interest. The thing is that I was upset with FRM getting that expensive: now it is made of two exams (=> twice the price!), you have expensive curriculums + additional expensive handbook and I’ve noticed that annual fees have been rising up quite sharply and steadily. It really made me feel that they wanted to skim the milk out of me. Now that I know they are simply a ‘profit-driven’ organization, I understand it and I’m simply not interested.
So my choice is to undertake PRM:
•        recognized to be as demanding as FRM by experts in the field
•        more quantitative that FRM
•        backed by top-tier universities (really important for me)
•        less expensive
•        more flexible
•        ethically grounded
Right now it might be a bit less reknowned than FRM outside the risk-management domain, but I do hope they will gain exposure (it looks like, they recently opened new offices in Asia) and I will try to support them and expand recognition of its program. I find that being more ethically sound make the whole affair less risky on the long-term, and guess what: it’s about risk-management!
I hope you will choose PRM too.