I'm not really trying to spend much for an additional credential but I'm also trying to pass it on my first try. I see there are multiple study packages-- Which ones did you go with? Or did you use an alternate study method?
Source:
https://www.17lands.com/leaderboard?expansion=MSH&format=ArenaDirect_Sealed
Assumptions:
I found that you are able to use the available 17lands data to estimate the individual results for a player. The available information provided is:
From that, you can mathematically deduce the following information:
Example:
Eken won 435 times and had a win rate of 70.4%, with 30 trophies and a trophy rate of 26.8%.
Dividing wins by win rate gives you 618 total matches.
618 total matches – 435 wins = 183 total losses.
Total Entries is trickier. You need to first calculate the statistical odds for going 7-0, 7-1, 6-2, …, 0-2 based on win rate. This is what I have:
| Description | Win Rate | Net Odds |
|---|---|---|
| 7-0 | 70.4% | 8.6% |
| 7-1 | 70.4% | 17.76% |
| 6-2 | 70.4% | 7.47% |
| 5-2 | 70.4% | 9.09% |
| 4-2 | 70.4% | 10.76% |
| 3-2 | 70.4% | 12.23% |
| 2-2 | 70.4% | 13.03% |
| 1-2 | 70.4% | 12.34% |
| 0-2 | 70.4% | 8.76% |
Next, I used various formulas to tie the win rate, trophy rate, and number of trophies to estimate the distribution, which now gives me the Total Entries, as well as the # of times they reached each result:
| Description | Estimated Results | Calculated Wins | Calculated Losses |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7-0 | 11 | 77 | 0 |
| 7-1 | 19 | 133 | 19 |
| 6-2 | 8 | 48 | 16 |
| 5-2 | 9 | 45 | 18 |
| 4-2 | 12 | 48 | 24 |
| 3-2 | 13 | 39 | 26 |
| 2-2 | 15 | 30 | 30 |
| 1-2 | 15 | 15 | 30 |
| 0-2 | 10 | 0 | 20 |
| 112 | 435 | 183 |
Based on these estimations, I then calculated how much they spent, as well as what their net profit was:
| Total Entries | 112 |
|---|---|
| Total Spend | $ 4,480.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (3-Wins) | $ 234.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (4-Wins) | $ 432.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (5-Wins) | $ 486.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (6-Wins) | $ 576.00 |
| Net Spend | $ 2,752.00 |
| Trophies | 30 |
| Collector Box Market | $ 455.00 |
| Total Won | $ 13,650.00 |
| Net Profit | $ 10,898.00 |
For fun, I ran this calculation for some other notable players:
Nummy (Trophy Rate of 15%):
| Total Entries | 40 |
|---|---|
| Total Spend | $ 1,600.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (3-Wins) | $ 90.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (4-Wins) | $ 72.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (5-Wins) | $ 216.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (6-Wins) | $ 432.00 |
| Net Spend | $ 790.00 |
| Trophies | 6 |
| Collector Box Market | $ 455.00 |
| Total Won | $ 2,730.00 |
| Net Profit | $ 1,940.00 |
Just Lola (Trophy Rate of 26.8%):
| Total Entries | 95 |
|---|---|
| Total Spend | $ 3,800.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (3-Wins) | $ 198.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (4-Wins) | $ 396.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (5-Wins) | $ 378.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (6-Wins) | $ 288.00 |
| Net Spend | $ 2,540.00 |
| Trophies | 26 |
| Collector Box Market | $ 455.00 |
| Total Won | $ 11,830.00 |
| Net Profit | $ 9,290.00 |
Duenyo (Trophy Rate of 23.3%):
| Total Entries | 28 |
|---|---|
| Total Spend | $ 1,120.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (3-Wins) | $ 54.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (4-Wins) | $ 108.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (5-Wins) | $ 108.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (6-Wins) | $ 432.00 |
| Net Spend | $ 418.00 |
| Trophies | 7 |
| Collector Box Market | $ 455.00 |
| Total Won | $ 3,185.00 |
| Net Profit | $ 2,767.00 |
HAUMPH (Trophy Rate of 31.30%):
| Total Entries | 15 |
|---|---|
| Total Spend | $ 600.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (3-Wins) | $ 36.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (4-Wins) | $ 36.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (5-Wins) | $ 54.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (6-Wins) | $ 72.00 |
| Net Spend | $ 402.00 |
| Trophies | 5 |
| Collector Box Market | $ 455.00 |
| Total Won | $ 2,275.00 |
| Net Profit | $ 1,873.00 |
Some notes: These results are not typical. This represents the best of the best. The average player will probably lose money on this event. Here is an example of a player who had a significantly lower trophy rate:
Drafta (Win Rate of 56.9%, Trophy Rate of 7%):
| Total Entries | 95 |
|---|---|
| Total Spend | $ 3,800.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (3-Wins) | $ 270.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (4-Wins) | $ 288.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (5-Wins) | $ 324.00 |
| Recovered from Gems (6-Wins) | $ 720.00 |
| Net Spend | $ 2,198.00 |
| Trophies | 5 |
| Collector Box Market | $ 455.00 |
| Total Won | $ 2,275.00 |
| Net Profit | $ 77.00 |
After taking out taxes, cost of selling, etc. it ends up being a wash/loss.
Conclusion:
I wanted to post this because there was a very misleading post suggesting that it’s impossible to make money from this event, which is simply not true. However, just because there’s a possibility of making money, it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s viable either. Furthermore, for those who grind these events, there is a significant upfront cost. Many of these people are investing hundreds/thousands of dollars. For them it is a calculated risk because they know it will result in a positive EV. A similar example would be blackjack card counters. Most people lack the skill, bankroll, and/or time and energy to grind something like this out. But if you are relatively skilled or just like doing this for fun, more power to you!
TL/DR: You can make a lot if you are among the top players. Good players will probably break even or lose a bit. Most players will lose.
If so, does it come in the form of a certificate? Or do they just waive your CPE requirements?
I see this article from Gleim, but it's from 2012 so I'm not sure if it's still accurate anymore.
https://www.gleim.com/cia-review/blog/continuing-professional-education/
I am an Internal Audit Manager with approximately 12 years of experience. I began my journey in April 2026 and I took the exam in June 2026. I used the following products to study:
Part 1. Gleim
Gleim has 20 different modules and I studied approximately 1-2 hours every other day, with the goal of completing a module per study session. My study sessions consisted of the following:
I would rinse and repeat for all 20 modules, and I would re-visit any areas where I scored below 80% on the adaptive quiz.
Once I completed all 20 modules, I took Gleim’s mock exam 1. I scored 75%. Gleim made recommendations on which modules I should re-visit. I used the same methodology to study those. I then took mock exam 2 and scored 77%. At this point, I wasn’t feeling terribly confident in my ability to pass the CIA exam. It’s unclear what the passing score actually is—some people say 80% because 600/750 = 80%. At this point, I hit a brick wall with my studying. No matter how much more material I tried to force myself to understand, it really came down to cramming practice question after practice question. So I began creating study sessions from the test bank. My study sessions ranged from 77% to 87% and I averaged about 45 seconds per question.
Part 2. IIA CIA Challenge Exam Practice Questions
I highly recommend purchasing these questions. You get two attempts. Before you take these practice exams, do not make the same mistake I made! Don’t just take the exam and submit it. All you get back is a score telling you the % you got correct. You will not be able to re-visit the questions you missed. However, if you “check your answer” for each question, it will show you which one was correct and which ones were wrong, as well as the rationale for the question. Make sure you study these before you hit submit. I scored 77% on my first attempt and 81% on my second attempt. But I really took the time to study why each question was right or wrong.
Part 3. CIA Challenge Exam
The night before the exam and the morning before the exam, I brushed up on last-minute topics and notes I had on various questions. I like to be in “test” mode before taking the real thing. I got my iced coffee, and drank it on the way to the testing center. I wanted to be caffeinated/alert.
After getting screened, I went into the testing room and put on the noise-cancelling headphones they provided. They also provide you a clipboard. My pace was approximately 1 minute per question and I had about 30 minutes to revisit any questions I flagged. In total, I flagged about 15 questions, and I had to guess on 3 of them. For the remaining questions, I was able to logically deduce my way to an answer.
At some point, I began just writing “A, B, C, D” on my whiteboard and immediately crossing out 2 of them. Then I would take the time to think about which of the two was the better answer.
After I was confident I couldn’t do any more, I raised my hand and turned in my materials. I then had an agonizing one month wait to get my results.
I honestly did not feel great about this exam or the studying process. I was disheartened to see that others were averaging 90% on their practice exams going into it. But I also told myself that if I failed, it was not the end of the world and I could re-take it when I was more prepared.
I got my results and was pleasantly surprised to see “Pass”!
Part 4. Final Thoughts
Neither the Gleim nor IIA practice questions were similar to the actual exam questions. I would say the Gleim questions were poorly worded and designed to trick you (70% close to actual). The IIA practice questions covered things that Gleim didn’t, such as using the verbiage that you conform to IIA audit standards (80% close to actual). However, both were very helpful in preparing me for the actual exam.
If you’re expecting the questions to be 1:1, you’re going about it the wrong way. You truly need to understand the concepts and why the answer is correct or incorrect. There were also a surprising number of questions on newer topics, such as AI and blockchain.
The test is difficult, but it’s not impossible. Just studying for the exam has made me into a much better auditor, and I can now apply many things I’ve learned to my role.
I've compiled some data on various contracts compared to inflation, as well as the contract terms and who was governor during those years. It should come as no surprise that State worker salaries have not kept up with inflation at all.
| Year | State Increase | CPI | Inflation | Difference | Contract Term(s) | Governor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2003 | 5.0% | 190.40 | 2.3% | 2.7% | 2003 - 2005 | Schwarzenegger |
| 2004 | 0.0% | 195.40 | 2.6% | -2.6% | 2003 - 2005 | Schwarzenegger |
| 2005 | 0.0% | 202.60 | 3.7% | -3.7% | 2003 - 2005 | Schwarzenegger |
| 2006 | 3.5% | 210.50 | 3.9% | -0.4% | 2003 - 2005, 2005 - 2008 | Schwarzenegger |
| 2007 | 4.0% | 217.42 | 3.3% | 0.7% | 2005 - 2008 | Schwarzenegger |
| 2008 | 0.0% | 224.81 | 3.4% | -3.4% | 2005 - 2008 | Schwarzenegger |
| 2009 | 0.0% | 224.11 | -0.3% | 0.3% | 2009 - 2010 | Schwarzenegger |
| 2010 | 0.0% | 226.92 | 1.3% | -1.3% | 2009 - 2010, 2010 - 2013 | Schwarzenegger |
| 2011 | 0.0% | 232.93 | 2.6% | -2.6% | 2010 - 2013 | Brown |
| 2012 | 0.0% | 238.16 | 2.2% | -2.2% | 2010 - 2013 | Brown |
| 2013 | 0.0% | 241.62 | 1.5% | -1.5% | 2010 - 2013, 2013 - 2016 | Brown |
| 2014 | 2.0% | 246.06 | 1.8% | 0.2% | 2013 - 2016 | Brown |
| 2015 | 2.5% | 249.67 | 1.5% | 1.0% | 2013 - 2016 | Brown |
| 2016 | 0.0% | 255.30 | 2.3% | -2.3% | 2013 - 2016, 2016 - 2019 | Brown |
| 2017 | 4.0% | 262.80 | 2.9% | 1.1% | 2016 - 2019 | Brown |
| 2018 | 4.0% | 272.51 | 3.7% | 0.3% | 2016 - 2019 | Brown |
| 2019 | 3.5% | 280.64 | 3.0% | 0.5% | 2016 - 2019 | Brown |
| 2020 | 2.5% | 285.32 | 1.7% | 0.8% | 2020 - 2023 | Newsom |
| 2021 | 2.0% | 297.37 | 4.2% | -2.2% | 2020 - 2023 | Newsom |
| 2022 | 2.5% | 319.22 | 7.3% | -4.8% | 2020 - 2023 | Newsom |
| 2023 | 3.0% | 331.80 | 3.9% | -0.9% | 2020 - 2023, 2023 - 2026 | Newsom |
| 2024 | 3.0% | 341.95 | 3.1% | -0.1% | 2023 - 2026 | Newsom |
| 2025 | 3.0% | 352.51 | 3.1% | -0.1% | 2023 - 2026 | Newsom |
| Total | 44.5% | 65.0% | -20.5% |
Inflation gap under Schwarzenegger: -7.6%
Inflation gap under Brown: -5.5%
Inflation gap under Newsom: -7.3%
Sources: