90-day CAIA study plan

Check whether the 204-hour plan fits

This calendar assigns 204 hours to one selected level. Count actual study appointments before deciding that 90 days is enough: twelve weeks at 16 hours and six final days at 12 hours produce the stated total. Time spent reading, attempting questions, reviewing errors and rehearsing all belongs inside that budget.

A candidate who can protect only ten hours a week has roughly 130 hours across thirteen weeks, leaving about 74 hours unallocated against this example. That arithmetic does not prove they will fail; it shows that this particular plan does not fit their capacity. A stronger prior foundation may change the work required, while unfamiliar statistics or written-response skills may increase it. Do not quietly remove the review phase to make the spreadsheet balance.

Use the first week to set your starting point

Before allocating every later week, attempt a few foundations without notes. For Level I, check percentage arithmetic, discounting, risk interpretation and a fund cash-flow measure. For Level II, check those foundations and add a short investor recommendation. These are planning probes, not a calibrated readiness test.

Suppose you can calculate a fund multiple but cannot distinguish distributions from residual NAV. Record that conceptual gap and place a repair inside the performance-measure block. Suppose the calculation is correct but your written recommendation ignores near-term cash needs. Add written decision practice from week one. A diagnostic is useful only when it changes a named study appointment.

Turn each week into appointments and outputs

A 16-hour example week can use four two-hour weekday sessions and two four-hour weekend blocks. Protect review inside those appointments. If your job makes weekends unpredictable, use shorter blocks across more days and reserve a movable buffer. The total is less important than whether the work repeatedly happens.

Use a tangible output to close every block. In early weeks, that might be a method explanation plus a changed-input problem. In later weeks, it might be a timed section and a categorized debrief. Mark a topic complete only when you have attempted its tasks, not merely reached the last page of the reading.

Recover a missed week without hiding the backlog

List the unfinished outputs, not just the missing hours. If you lost six hours but completed the core reading, the backlog might be two practice blocks and their review. Move those exact tasks into the next available buffer and check which new tasks must shift. Avoid doubling the following week if that would exceed the time you can actually protect.

For example, a Level I candidate misses the private-debt practice in week six. They retain the hedge-fund introduction in week seven, move one optional rereading block to credit calculations, and use the weekend buffer to retest the debt methods. If several weeks are missing, small swaps are no longer enough. Recalculate the remaining scope and consider a longer preparation period.

Use checkpoints before the final rehearsal

At the end of week four, inspect foundational methods you still cannot explain. At week eight, compare coverage against the current companion and assign every remaining outcome a home. During weeks ten and eleven, rehearse the response formats and diagnose unfinished work. These checkpoints prevent a tidy calendar from hiding incomplete learning.

Keep the final days lighter so you can retrieve key distinctions, confirm logistics and arrive rested. If a full new topic remains untouched, do not label that a final-review task. Record the scope gap and make a realistic decision about the time remaining. Neither this calendar nor a small public sample supplies a passing prediction.

• Level I preparation checkpoints
• Level II preparation checkpoints