Browse FINRA SIE & Series Exam Guides

Series 162 Cheat Sheet: Supervisory Analyst Part II

April 23, 2026

High-yield Series 162 cheat sheet for FINRA Supervisory Analyst Part II: exam facts, report-review controls, calculation integrity, reasonable basis, and conclusion traps.

On this page

Series 162 is “research report basis review.” Most questions ask whether the report’s data, calculations, and conclusions are accurate, consistent, and adequately supported.

Quick links:

Series 162 at a glance

  • Items: 50
  • Time: 120 minutes
  • Passing score: 74%
  • Series 16 part: Part II, Valuation of Securities
  • Pace target: ~2:24 per question

Exam map

  • Accuracy, consistency, sources of data, and calculations — 32%
  • Reasonable basis for analyst conclusions — 68%

Fast role frame

Do not think like…Think like…
the analyst defending a valuation modelthe supervisory analyst testing whether the report is supportable
the reader deciding whether to buy or sellthe reviewer deciding whether the recommendation has a reasonable basis
the modeler chasing precisionthe reviewer finding source, assumption, consistency, and conclusion defects

Data and calculation controls

ControlWhat to ask in a vignette
Source qualityAre third-party data, management guidance, estimates, and market data identified and current?
ReconciliationDo the numbers tie across financial statements, tables, per-share metrics, and narrative claims?
Calculation integrityAre ratios, valuation outputs, and adjustments applied consistently?
Accounting contextDo footnotes, special items, MD&A, and reporting choices change the analysis?
Market dataIs the reference data stale, mismatched, or selectively updated?

Reasonable-basis controls

ControlWhat to ask in a vignette
Model architectureDo assumptions flow cleanly into estimates, valuation, and target price?
Valuation methodDoes DCF, relative valuation, bond analysis, or technical support fit the conclusion being drawn?
Recommendation alignmentIs the rating or target stronger than the support justifies?
Scenario disciplineAre risks, downside cases, and catalysts treated honestly?
Context supportDo economics, industry, company, and risk analysis support the issuer-specific conclusion?

Best-answer checklist

  1. Is the weak point factual, numerical, or analytical?
  2. Are the sources and calculations internally consistent?
  3. Does the conclusion actually follow from the support in the report?
  4. What should the supervisory analyst challenge, revise, or reject?

Common traps

  • reading it like a broad equity-analysis exam instead of a supervisory-review exam
  • accepting a plausible conclusion without checking the support
  • focusing on formulas while missing source-quality or internal-consistency issues
  • forgetting the official CFA Level I exemption note when route planning
  • approving a target or rating because the story is persuasive
  • treating technical indicators or macro commentary as a substitute for issuer-specific support

One-minute final review

Before you walk into the exam, be able to say:

  • Series 162 is the valuation half of Series 16.
  • The passing score is 74%.
  • Reasonable-basis review is the larger function.
  • The correct answer usually challenges weak support, not merely weak wording.
  • When two answers seem plausible, prefer the answer that makes the report more internally consistent and defensible.

Practice this exam

Use this free guide for review, then Start Series 162 Practice on Finance Prep for timed questions, topic drills, and detailed explanations.

Revised on Friday, May 29, 2026
Study Plan
FAQ