Question

The Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) designation is fast becoming a requirement for serious investment professionals. It is an attractive alternative to getting an MBA for students wanting a career in investment. A student of finance is curious to know if a CFA designation is a more lucrative option than an MBA. He collects data on 42 recent CFAs with a mean salary of $145,000 and a standard deviation of $44,000. A sample of 54 MBAs results in a mean salary of $126,000 with a standard deviation of $20,000 Assume that μ1 is the population mean for individuals with a CFA designation and μ2 is the population mean of individuals with MBAs. (You may find it useful to reference the appropriate table: z table or t table) a. Set up the hypotheses to test if a CFA designation is more lucrative than an MBA at the 1% significance level. b-1. Calculate the value of the test statistic. Do not assume that the population variances are equal. (Round all intermediate calculations to at least 4 decimal places and final answer to 2 decimal places.) Test statistic b-2. Find the p-value. p-value<0.01 p-value 2 0.10 0.05p-value<0.10 0.025p-value<0.05 0.01 p-value<0.025 At the 1% significance level, is a CFA designation more lucrative than an MBA? H0. At the 1% significance level, we conclude that the CFA designation is more lucrative than an MBA.

Answer 1

HAYe We have h: 시,-4.10 Correct ophoh C 呵-1-Test staffs t/c 145 00O 2000 4 2 -t 200002 2.5976 2.60 b-2 4. 2.60 P value< O. o)