[quote=derekgaddy]

I have my Series 7 and 63 and I'm being told I need my Investment Advisor license. Which exam should I take? Both will get me my IA license but I'm not sure the difference between the two.

[/quote]

The Series 65 is for people who do not hold a Series 7.

It is my impression that you must take Series 66 since you do.

The good news is Series 66 is shorter than Series 65 since the latter includes parts of Series 7.

The bad news is the questions on Series 66 generally require a deeper understanding of the industry.

Because I have the 7 and 63 I think I can take either the 66 or 65. If what you said is true about the make-up of the exams I'd rather take the S65. The 66 includes the 63 crap I already have and if the 65 includes some 7 content and more questions I'm fine with that. I hated that 63 test.

65 has nothing to do with the 7. 66 is a combo of the 65 and 63. 66 is said

to be a bit easier.

[quote=The Truth]65 has nothing to do with the 7. 66 is a combo of the 65 and 63. 66 is said
to be a bit easier.[/quote]

Wrong.

People with Series 6 take Series 65 instead of 66 because it incorporates things like put and call strategies, types of municipal bonds and some things about tax shelters that the National Association of State Securities Administrators want the candidate to know.

Since those things are on Series 7 they are omitted from Series 66.

[quote=derekgaddy]

Because I have the 7 and 63 I think I can take either the 66 or 65. If what you said is true about the make-up of the exams I'd rather take the S65. The 66 includes the 63 crap I already have and if the 65 includes some 7 content and more questions I'm fine with that. I hated that 63 test.

[/quote]

I don't believe you get a choice.  You must take the Series 66, as I said the Series 65 is for people who do not hold a Series 7.

What the Series 66 will do for you is allow you to avoid taking the Series 63, but if you already have 63 that's a moot point.

For new brokers the appropriate licenses to take would be Series 7 to make you legal at the federal level and Series 66 which makes you legal at the state level and also qualifies you as an IAR.

Established brokers take Series 65 if they do not have a Series 7 and Series 66 if they do.

Series 65 is 130 questions in 3 hours--less time than is allowed for Series 7.

Series 66 is 100 questions in 2 1/2 hours--a bit more time than is allowed for Series 7.

The Series 65 will have about 90 of the same type of questions that appear on Series 66 and the other 40 are things that appear on Series 7 exams.

Since you have to 63 ....you take the 65.

66 is required if you didnt take the 63( not related to 7)

63+65=66

It's really that simple.

I went: 6, thought about the 65, did the 7 instead, then 66.

[quote=Big Easy Flood]I don't believe you get a choice.  You must take the Series 66, as I said the Series 65 is for people who do not hold a Series 7.[/quote]

I believe you do.  Like derekgaddy, I already had the 7 and 63 and was given the choice of taking the 65 or 66.  It was suggested that I choose the 66 because it is considered the easier of the two.  So I did.

I can't say from first hand experience which one is actually easier because, obviously,  I only took the one.  But I can tell you from first hand experience that the 66 is an easy exam. 

Which exam should I take: Series 65 vs. Series 66?
Candidates that have met or will meet the co-requisite of the Series 66 exam, would elect to take the Series 66 instead of the Series 65 exam due to its brevity, scope and relative level of difficulty.  Candidates for the Series 66 exam must also pass the Series 7 exam.  Those candidates that are not eligible to sit for the Series 66 exam can sit for the more lengthy and onerous Series 65 exam which carries no prerequisite or co-requisite.

As I said, in order to be allowed to take the Series 66 you must have a Series 7, or plan to get one (your 66 will not be valid until you pass Series 7.)

Series 65 is for people who do not have, and do not intent to take, Series 7.

The relationship to Series 63 is this.  Both Series 65 and 66 will satisfy the Series 63 requirement in states that require a 63.

These days the only people who take Series 63 are those who are ill informed about the availability of the 65/66 substitution.

There are still a few states that do not require the Series 65 or 66, in those states rookies may be encouraged to take Series 63 by short sighted management that doesn't realize the power of being ready for what is coming instead of simply satisfying the current requirement.

There are states that never did require the Series 63, but have adopted the Series 65 or 66.  In those states there would be no need to take Series 63 because it's not required, and if you seek registration in a state that does your 65 or 66 will substitute for the 63.

Much better, Big Easy.  Did you go to the NASD site and brush up on the tests after your earlier, wrong, answers on the topic? 

[quote=Big Easy Flood]

Which exam should I take: Series 65 vs. Series 66?
Candidates that have met or will meet the co-requisite of the Series 66 exam, would elect to take the Series 66 instead of the Series 65 exam due to its brevity, scope and relative level of difficulty.  Candidates for the Series 66 exam must also pass the Series 7 exam.  Those candidates that are not eligible to sit for the Series 66 exam can sit for the more lengthy and onerous Series 65 exam which carries no prerequisite or co-requisite.

As I said, in order to be allowed to take the Series 66 you must have a Series 7, or plan to get one (your 66 will not be valid until you pass Series 7.)

Series 65 is for people who do not have, and do not intent to take, Series 7.

The relationship to Series 63 is this.  Both Series 65 and 66 will satisfy the Series 63 requirement in states that require a 63.

These days the only people who take Series 63 are those who are ill informed about the availability of the 65/66 substitution.

There are still a few states that do not require the Series 65 or 66, in those states rookies may be encouraged to take Series 63 by short sighted management that doesn't realize the power of being ready for what is coming instead of simply satisfying the current requirement.

There are states that never did require the Series 63, but have adopted the Series 65 or 66.  In those states there would be no need to take Series 63 because it's not required, and if you seek registration in a state that does your 65 or 66 will substitute for the 63.

[quote=lawsucks]

Much better, Big Easy.  Did you go to the NASD site and brush up on the tests after your earlier, wrong, answers on the topic? 

[/quote]

It would be fun to have you cite what I said earlier that was wrong.

[quote=Big Easy Flood][quote=lawsucks]

Much better, Big Easy.  Did you go to the NASD site and brush up on the tests after your earlier, wrong, answers on the topic? 

[/quote]

It would be fun to have you cite what I said earlier that was wrong.[/quote]

Easy...you said he did not have a choice when he does.  If you have a 7 and a 63, you can take the 65 OR 66.  I know this for a fact because several at my former employer took the 66 when I chose the 65.  We all had 7 & 63.

Have a little more crow, Put.

I don't believe you get a choice.  You must take the Series 66, as I said the Series 65 is for people who do not hold a Series 7.

What the Series 66 will do for you is allow you to avoid taking the Series 63, but if you already have 63 that's a moot point.

I believe that do have a choice. You can take either the 65 or the 66 and 63 combo.  You are correct in the 65 is for people who don't have a Series 7 but that doesn't mean that you can't take that test IF you have a 7.

I am taking the series 65, as I already have the 6, 63, 7, so that if I decided to become or work for an RIA I could dispense with the series 7 if I wanted to.  I probably won't do that, but it is nice to have options. The tests are relatively similar with the 65 being a bit more comprehensive.  We need to know this information anyway and it doesn't hurt to refresh myself on topics that I have already been tested on. 

I am hating the series 63 material in the 65 study materials.

[quote=Indyone][quote=Big Easy Flood][quote=lawsucks]

Much better, Big Easy.  Did you go to the NASD site and brush up on the tests after your earlier, wrong, answers on the topic? 

[/quote]

It would be fun to have you cite what I said earlier that was wrong.[/quote]

Easy...you said he did not have a choice when he does.  If you have a 7 and a 63, you can take the 65 OR 66.  I know this for a fact because several at my former employer took the 66 when I chose the 65.  We all had 7 & 63.

Have a little more crow, Put.

[quote=babbling looney]

I am taking the series 65, as I already have the 6, 63, 7, so that if I decided to become or work for an RIA I could dispense with the series 7 if I wanted to.  I probably won't do that, but it is nice to have options. The tests are relatively similar with the 65 being a bit more comprehensive.  We need to know this information anyway and it doesn't hurt to refresh myself on topics that I have already been tested on. 

I am hating the series 63 material in the 65 study materials.

[/quote]

OK, I made a phone call and the reason I have my opinion is because it is/was a firm policy that people with a Series 7 were to take the Series 66.

You, Babbling, have said on several occasions that you see these exams as a way of replacing your Series 7.  I don't think that will work, nor do I understand why you would want to let your Series 7 lapse.

Series 6 and 7 are NASD licenses that make you legal at the federal level.  Series 63 makes you legal at the state level.  Series 65 and 66 are specific to becoming an Investment Advisor Representative.

What good is being an Invest Advisor Representative if you're not licensed by the NASD with a Series 6 or 7?

[quote=joedabrkr]
It's important that Put keep current on these items, as technocrats like him are paid to deal with regulatory minutiae so that advisers have time to do the real work! 
[/quote]

And you're doing the "real work" by playing around with this forum?

Boys and girls, Joe is a failed UBS broker whose last gasp at staying inthe business was to leave UBS and seek the higher payout offered by LPL.

By doing that he hopes to turn $30,000 in annual income into $45,000 and catch up on his past due mortgage before they reposses the house.

[quote=Big Easy Flood]

[quote=joedabrkr]
It’s important that Put keep current on these items, as technocrats like him are paid to deal with regulatory minutiae so that advisers have time to do the real work! 
[/quote]

And you're doing the "real work" by playing around with this forum?

Boys and girls, Joe is a failed UBS broker whose last gasp at staying inthe business was to leave UBS and seek the higher payout offered by LPL.

By doing that he hopes to turn $30,000 in annual income into $45,000 and catch up on his past due mortgage before they reposses the house.

[quote=lawsucks]

These days the only people who take Series 63 are those who are ill informed about the availability of the 65/66 substitution.

[quote=joedabrkr]

By the way-your income estimates are a little off.
[/quote]

I know, but I felt like it would be good for you ego if I overstated your income.

Hope springs eternal at places like LPL, those who fail at being real brokers can drift their way and get one more chance.