RFP Module 4 study materials
RFP Module 4 study resources

RFP Module 4: Fundamentals of Financial Planning: Process, Statements, TVM and Ratios

RFP Module 4 · Work through your exam, one topic at a time.

All guide sections

Fundamentals of Financial Planning: Process, Statements, TVM and Ratios

What this domain tests

This domain supplies the vocabulary and mechanics the other six domains assume: the planning process, personal financial statements, time value of money, ratio diagnostics, and the professional framework (MFPC Code of Ethics, CMSA 2007, SIDC licensing, BNM for insurance/takaful). Questions are usually applied, not definitional.

Core rules

  • Six-step process: establish and define the relationship; gather quantitative and qualitative data; analyse and assess; develop and present the plan; implement; monitor and review. Each step has a deliverable - skipping straight to a product is a scoring error.
  • Net worth = assets at fair value minus liabilities. Cash-flow surplus = income minus expenses minus debt servicing.
  • Diagnostic ratios: basic liquidity (liquid assets / monthly expenses) 3–6 months; debt-to-asset below 50%; savings ratio at least 10% of gross income; debt service ratio no more than one-third of gross income.
  • TVM: match the rate to the compounding period, set payments per year correctly, use END mode for ordinary annuities and BEGIN for annuities due, and separate nominal from real (inflation-adjusted) figures.

Worked example

A client saves RM1,200 at the end of each month for 10 years at 5% p.a. compounded monthly. Monthly rate = 0.05/12 = 0.4167%; n = 120. Future value factor = ((1.004167^120 − 1) / 0.004167) ≈ 155.28. FV ≈ RM186,340. If the deposits are made at the start of each month, multiply by 1.004167 → factor 155.93 → RM187,120. Only the timing changed; the rate and term did not.

Traps that cost marks

  • Using an annual n with a monthly rate, or leaving the calculator in BEGIN mode by accident.
  • Presenting total assets as net worth, ignoring the mortgage.
  • Mixing a nominal return with inflation-adjusted spending, which overstates the funding gap.
  • Treating the emergency fund as an investment portfolio and applying equity risk to it.