CAT 2019 Analysis by IMS: Slot 1 and Slot 2

CAT 2019 Analysis by IMS - The CAT question paper 2019 was of moderate difficulty without any surprises. Read here in detail, CAT 2019 analysis by IMS.

The first slot of CAT 2019 took place today (November 24) between 9 am and 12 noon. The exam was conducted smoothly without any technical or other glitches. There was no change in the overall exam pattern or in the types of questions from the last three years’ CAT. Take a look at detailed CAT 2019 analysis of slot 1 question paper, to know the types of questions asked, section-wise difficulty level, break up of the CAT question paper, sectional cut offs and expected scores.

CAT 2019 Analysis: Highlights

Section No.	Section Name	Total Number of Questions	Number of Multiple Choice Questions	Number of TITA Questions	Level of Difficulty
I	Verbal Ability & Reading Comprehension	34	27	07	Medium
II	Data Interpretation & Logical Reasoning	32	24	08	Medium
III	Quantitative Ability	34	23	11	Medium
	TOTAL	100	74	26	Medium

Based on the feedback received from several candidates we estimate the scores and percentiles*** to be as follows:

Percentile	VARC score	DILR score	QA score	Overall Score
99 %ile	70	51	57	161-164
95%ile	59	40	40	127-130
90%ile	52	34	31	107-110
85%ile (CUT-OFF)	45	29	27	95-98

CAT 2019: Verdict

• The first slot of CAT 2019 was more or less on similar lines as CAT 2018 in terms of Level of Difficulty. There were no surprises or new question types in CAT 2019.
• No new question types were seen in any of the sections.
• An overall attempt of 68-70 questions with an accuracy of 85 percent should be classified as a good performance in CAT 2019 and fetch around 99 percentile.

Also Read:

• CAT 2019 exam analysis slot 1 and 2
• CAT 2019: Student reactions & reviews

Section-wise: CAT 2019 Analysis

Section I – Verbal Ability and Reading Comprehension

• The overall difficulty level of VARC Section of CAT 2019 was medium. It was more difficult than CAT 2018.
• The VARC section was a replica of the CAT 2018 section in terms of question types. Grammar and Vocabulary questions were absent as in the last four years.
• RC had 4 passages with 5 questions each & 1 passage with 4 questions, making up the 24 questions.
• Few questions were direct and easy. Most of the questions were inference based and, like in 2018, critical reasoning type questions were also present. 
• The length of the passages varied from 450 words to 500 words.
• Similar to 2018 CAT, the Paragraph Jumbles Questions consisted of 4 jumbled sentences.  Of the 10 Non-RC (VA) questions (Shuffled) - 7 were TITA and 3 were MCQs.
• Three out-of-context sentence questions were in TITA format
• Four paragraph jumbles were in TITA format
• Three paragraph summary/author’s opinion questions – MCQs (with negative marks)

Break up of VARC section of CAT 2019:

Area / Questions	No. of Questions	Type of Questions	Level of Difficulty
Reading Comprehension	24	MCQ	Overall: Medium to Difficult
RC-1:  British folk music	5	MCQ	Difficult
RC- 2: Topophilia	5	MCQ	Medium
RC-3: Emperor Penguins	4	MCQ	Easy
RC-4: Internet Shopping and choice anxiety	5	MCQ	Medium
RC-5: Origin of story of Aladdin	5	MCQ	Medium
Verbal Ability	10	MCQ & TITA	Overall: Medium
Parajumbles ( 4 sentences)	4	TITA	Easy-1,  Medium-2,  Difficult-1
Out of Context sentence	3	TITA	Medium-2, Difficult-1
Summary	3	MCQ	Easy-1 , Medium-1,  Difficult-1

Overall, an attempt of 24 to 26 questions in this section with 85% accuracy should be a good bet.

Section II – Data Interpretation & Logical Reasoning 

• The DI-LR section had a total of 8 sets with 4 questions in each set. There were 2 sets of Data Interpretation and 5 sets of Logical Reasoning while 1 set was a combination of DI and LR. There were 3 easy to medium sets, those sets were easily doable. 2 sets were medium, 1 set was medium to difficult and 2 sets were difficult.
• Some of the sets were difficult to comprehend and very time consuming, identifying and skipping those sets (Archery set, Crimes in States and Street Intersection) and attempting all the remaining sets would take the score high. So selection of the right sets to solve was the key to a good performance in this section.
• One set was completely TITA and the remaining 4 TITA questions were dispersed across 2 individual sets with 2 TITA each. Five sets were completely MCQ. There were a total of 8 TITA questions

A detailed description of the sets in this section is given below for your reference:

Set No.	Area	Set Description	Number of Questions	Level of Difficulty	Question Type
1	Logical Reasoning – Arrangement based	Linear Arrangement in Super Market	4	Medium	4 MCQ
2	Data Interpretation – Calculation based	Bar Chart + Table Crimes in States	4	Difficult	2 MCQ 2 TITA
3	Logical Reasoning – Games & Tournament based	Archery	4	Difficult	4 MCQ
4	Logical Reasoning – Puzzle based	Prizes to be put in 100 boxes	4	Medium	2 MCQ 2 TITA
5	Logical Reasoning – Puzzle based	Coding	4	Easy to Medium	4 TITA
6	Data Interpretation – Reasoning based	Spider Chart on 5 vendors and 6 attributes	4	Easy to Medium	2 MCQ 2 TITA
7	Logical Reasoning – Puzzle based	Streets Intersection	4	Medium to Difficult	4 MCQ
8	Logical Reasoning – Arrangement based	Dancers and Composers	4	Easy to Medium	4 MCQ

Some of the sets that could have been definitely solved were the ones based on the spider chart, coding and dancers & composers. Overall the section was marginally easier as compared to last year CAT. An attempt of around 5 sets (18-20 questions) in this section with 85%-90% accuracy should see percentile in the vicinity of 99 in this section.

Section III - Quantitative Ability

This section was of medium difficulty level. There were 13 easy, 13-15 medium and 6-8 difficult questions. In fact as per student feedback it was slightly easier than QA section of last year CAT but tougher than QA section of CAT 2017 slots.

•  Like the last couple of years CAT QA section, this section was dominated by Arithmetic with 13 questions followed by Modern Math with 8 questions, Geometry with 7 questions and Algebra with 5 questions. There was only one question of numbers.
•  There were 11 TITA questions this year.
• If one went through the entire section, there were 10 to 12 sitters for the taking while 6-8 questions that made students sweat.

Following was the area wise break-up of the questions in this section.

Area	Number of questions			Total
Level of Difficulty	Easy	Medium	Difficult
Numbers		1		1
Arithmetic	11	2		13
Algebra		3	2	5
Geometry	2	4	1	7
Modern Maths		5	3	8

Surprisingly, there were no diagrams in any Geometry questions but the questions were of different difficulty levels, from easy to medium to difficult. All the Arithmetic questions were doable. Overall an attempt of 20 to 22 questions in this section with 85 percent accuracy should be a good bet.

***The scores and percentiles mentioned in this analysis are indicators based on the feedback from students and IMS experts and are in no way related to the results, which will be declared by the IIMs in January 2020. You are advised to wait for the results.

CAT 2019 Analysis: Slot 2

The second slot examination for CAT 2019 was conducted between 2.30 p.m. and 5.30 p.m. Based on feedback from our students and faculty, we compared the difficulty of each section:

Section	Actual Difficulty Level	Compared to CAT 2019 Slot 1	Compared to CAT 2018
VARC	Moderate to Tough	Tougher	Tougher
DILR	Moderate to Tough	At par	At par
QA	Easy to Moderate	Easier	Tougher

Like slot 1, all the RC questions were together (1-24), but were not represented as a separate section. These were followed by the 10 non-RC questions. Like CAT 2017, the DILR sets had a mix of MCQ and NE type questions.

The calculator provided was a simple calculator, rather than a scientific one. Like slot I, the watermark was absent from the test, thereby making the student’s life easier. The overall interface replicated the official CAT player provided by the CAT authorities

Overall Breakup

Section	Section Name	MCQ	NE (TITA)	Total	Difficulty
I	Verbal Ability & Reading Comprehension	24	10	34	Moderate to Tough
II	Data Interpretation & Logical Reasoning	24	8	32	Moderate to Tough
III	Quantitative Ability	22	12	34	Easy to Moderate

Section I – Verbal Ability and Reading Comprehension

• Level of Difficulty – Moderate to Tough
• Like CAT 2018, the overall structure remained constant. There were 4 RCs of 5 questions each and 1 RC of 4 questions each. However, unlike CAT Slot I, the 4-question RC was after all the 5-question RCs.
• The other question types – Jumbled Sentences, Paragraph Summary and Contextual Odd Man Out questions – were similar to previous CATs. Like CAT 2018, the Paragraph Summaries were MCQs in CAT 2019 and definitely on the tougher side.
• The RCs were mainly in the 400-500 word length range and based on diverse topics such British Colonialism and Squatter Cities. Apart from the one passage on British Colonialism, the rest were easy to read. However, most questions were inferential with very close options.
• The Jumbled Sentences and Contextual Odd Man Out questions were moderate to tough, with some questions being really tough.
• RC topics ranged from diverse area from dense ones like British Colonialism and impact of language on culture to readable ones like Digital Colonialism by Google, Squatter Cities and Green Impact; and Dispersal of Bureaucrats.
• It was possible to attempt 24 to 26 questions with high accuracy.  24 attempts with 80 percent accuracy could fetch 97 percentile, and 27 attempts at similar accuracy could get around 99 percentile.

Section II: Data Interpretation & Logical Reasoning

• Level of Difficulty – Moderate to Tough
• The section was almost similar to the first slot, but the easy and tough sets were very clearly delineated.
• Like CAT 2018 and the morning slot, the sets had a mix of both MCQ and NE questions. Some of the sets were a combination of both LR and DI, though their proportion was slightly less this year.
• Two sets were purely DI based (scatter plot on rainfall and spider chart on profit/loss) and resembled typical NMAT sets more than CAT sets. These were the easiest sets of the test and should definitely have been attempted.
• Also, the set on Venn diagrams was easy and should have been tried.
• The sets on pouches in different rows/columns and on teams with languages were deceptively tricky and time consuming. These should have been left for later.
• The sets on tournaments, doctors and setting of the paper are being considered as the toughest sets and could have been skipped.
• It was possible to attempt 18-19 questions in this section to get a 99 percentile or above.

Section III - Quantitative Ability

• Level of Difficulty – Easy to Moderate
• Unlike CAT 2018, the QA section of CAT 2019, slot 2, was definitely easier compared to the previous three years. There were a number of easy questions, especially in Arithmetic and Modern Maths.
• A key feature of the questions this year was that a number of questions tested a mixture of concepts. So, candidates had to qualitatively know the significance of various properties and concepts, and apply them accordingly.
• The section was dominated by Arithmetic (13 questions), followed by Algebra (10 questions), Modern Maths (6 questions) and Geometry (5 questions).
• There were fewer NE questions (11) compared to earlier CAT exams.
• Solving 21-22 questions with 85-90% accuracy would be a good performance of this section to get 99 percentile.

On the whole, both the morning and evening slots of CAT were similar and well balanced. However, individually the difficulty level of sections varied. A redeeming feature for students was that no new question types were reported.

An overall performance of 64-66 questions with 85-90% accuracy can be considered a good performance for this slot.

The corresponding marks for a 99 percentile would be:

Sections	CAT score
VARC	65
DILR	49
QA	60
Overall	166-168

Watch Video:

Download: Institute wise IIM CAT cut off

Read More:

• CAT 2019: Exam analysis and expected cut offs
• CAT 2019 score vs percentile
• CAT 2019 answer key – know how to download
• Previous years’ and expected CAT cut offs

CAT Percentile Predictor

IIM & Non-IIM Call Predictor