IIFT 2018 was a difficult test, in fact, it was more difficult than 2017. The QA Section and surprisingly the LR (which is usually amongst the highest scoring) sections were the toughest in recent years
The overall pattern remained the same with a total of 114 questions and 6 Sections. The number of questions in each section also remained the same as last year .However, there were changes in the weightage (marks) in the two sections of Verbal Ability and Data Interpretation . For the Verbal Ability questions the marks per question came down from 1 to 0.75 and for the Data Interpretation questions the marks per question increased from 0.75 to 1 .
Like in the previous years, each question had 4 options and carried negative marks of 1/3rd of the allotted marks for each question.
The following table shows the overall structure of IIFT 2018 and 2017 at a glance:
|IIFT 2018||IIFT 2017|
|Verbal Ability (English)||20||0.75||15||20||1||20|
In IIFT exam, the overall cut-off is significantly more than the sum of the individual sectional cut-offs. Therefore, ideally, a student should have attempted a few questions in each section and devoted more time and attempted maximum questions from the sections from his/her strength. In the following paragraphs, the analysis of the individual sections is given. The time allotment and ideal attempt in each section have been mentioned from the point of view of a student who wants to maximize his/her score in that section.
Since time constraint is severe in IIFT, attempts in RC are often moderate.
|Passage Topic||No. of Questions||Type of Questions||Level of Difficulty|
|Meaning of culture
(Approx. 900 words)
|3||3 Inferential||Medium to Difficult|
|Public Intellectual (Approx. 1000 words)||3||1 Direct
|Medium to Difficult|
|Information (Approx. 1000 words)||4||3 Direct
|Medium to Difficult|
|Computer Science & Liberal arts (Approx. 1000 words)||3||1 Direct
|Medium to Difficult|
|GDP (Approx. 900 words)||3||1 Direct
An attempt of about 6 to 8 questions with 80 per cent accuracy in about 20 minutes would be considered good.
The Verbal Ability Section of IIFT 2018 was difficult.
All the questions in this section were based on the English Language as a subject rather than reasoning or analysis, except for the 2 paragraph Jumbles questions. Unlike the technical questions in grammar of last year, this year the questions were application based like sentence correction and spot the error questions.
The Vocabulary questions dominated the Section. As many as 13 questions were vocab based, including the 3 Sentence completion questions. Like last year there were questions about the origin of the words. None of the anticipated question types like synonym, antonyms, etc., were present. Like last year there were anagrams questions this year too. Error spotting and sentence correction questions were in the familiar format. In short, there were no new question types.
|Type||No. of Questions||Level of Difficulty|
|Match the correct answers (Vocabulary)||02||Medium|
|Fill in the Blanks (2 blanks)||03||Easy - Medium|
|Identify the error||02||Easy|
|Anagram and synonym||03||Difficult|
|Identify the origin/source of the words||04||Difficult|
|Sentence Correction||02||Easy to Medium|
An attempt of about 8 to 10 questions with 80-85% accuracy in about 15 minutes would be considered a good attempt.
The GA section this year was of Medium difficulty level, compared to the tough GA of last year.
Like last year General Awareness section had 18 questions. However, the long paragraph based questions of last year were not present. Instead, the normal MCQs and the match the column questions (2 column questions) typical of IIFT made up the Section.
14 questions were normal MCQs, and 4 questions were match the column questions testing awareness of multiple things. Overall the section was not very tough. There were 8 static GK questions and 10 dynamic. Questions covered a wide range of areas and gave no special advantage to people who may be experts in a particular area.
Several questions from IMS GK Compendium for IIFT appeared in the test.
|Current Affairs||0||2||1 Medium 1 Difficult|
|Sports /Authors||2||0||2 Easy|
|World trade||0||2||2 Medium|
|Economics||1||2||1 Easy 2 Medium|
|Politics||0||2||1 Medium 1 Difficult|
An attempt of about 8 to 10 questions with about 60-70% accuracy in about 7-8 minutes would be considered a good attempt.
This section was at one notch higher level of difficulty than in IIFT-2017. Traditionally there have been at least a few sitters in the Quantitative Ability section in IIFT exam. However, this year, there were no sitters as such and most of the questions were at medium to high level of difficulty.
This section was dominated by Geometry and Modern Mathematics. Some questions in this section, especially the ones on Geometry were highly calculation intensive. Several questions had options with unfriendly appearance (numbers such as etc). As a result, selection of the right questions to attempt was very important.
The following table shows the break-up of the Quantitative Ability section.
|Time & Work||1||1|
|Work, Pipe & Cisterns||1||1|
|Permutation & Combination||1||1|
A total attempt of about 9-10 questions with 80-85% accuracy in about 35-40 minutes would be considered a good attempt in this section.
Keeping with the tradition of IIFT exam, the DI sets in this year’s exam were also fairly calculation intensive. In terms of level of difficulty, this section was comparable to the Data Interpretation section in IIFT-2017. There were 5 sets with 4 questions each. Traditionally IIFT exam usually had at least a few DI sets with 5 questions. However, there was no set with 5 questions this year, while the representation of the data was equally complicated, as a result of which more effort was required to solve this section. Like in IIFT-2017, many questions were of the form “which of the following had third highest or third lowest….”, which required calculation for all the entries in the table. Most of the sets were data heavy. As a result, interpretation of the data and understanding the question were time-consuming. The selection of sets to attempt was very important.
The following table shows the break-up of the sets:
|Set||Type of the DI set||DI Set||No. of Questions||Difficulty Level|
|1||Table||DI set on select economic indicators for different regions and different countries of the world||4||Moderate to difficult|
|2||Bar graph and Line chart||DI set on the occupancy rate of different hotel chains||4||Moderate to difficult|
|3||Table||DI set on the global revenue break-up of IBM||4||Moderate|
|4||Table and Stacked graph||DI set on Logistics Performance Index||4||Easy to Moderate|
|5||Table, Bar Graph and Line Chart||DI set on Industry Indicators||4||Moderate to difficult|
An attempt of about 7-9 questions with 80-85% accuracy in 25-30 minutes would be considered a good attempt in this section.
This section was dominated by sets on arrangements. Unlike previous years, there was only one standalone question, while the remaining 19 questions were spread across total 6 sets. The set on six friends working for different companies and staying at different hotels was relatively easier as compared to other sets and must not have been missed. The sets on circular arrangement and 4x3 matrix on code-words were the toughest of the lot and should have been attempted only at the end, if time permitted. The set on venn diagram (types of goods) was ambiguously framed. The set on sequential output and the standalone question were good possible candidates for attempting in order to boost the score.
Unlike previous years, there were no questions on verbal reasoning, directions, coding-decoding or data sufficiency.
The following table shows the break-up of the sets in the section:
|Type of the set||Description||Level of difficulty||Number of questions|
|Matrix arrangement||6 friends working in different companies and staying in different hotels.||Medium||4|
|Binary Logic||Birthday party||Medium to difficult||3|
|Matrix arrangement||4x3 matrix of code-words||Difficult||4|
|Circular arrangement||8 persons discussing different issues||Medium to difficult||4|
|Venn diagram||3 set venn diagram on types of goods||Medium to difficult||3|
|Sequential Output||Easy to Medium||2|
|Standalone question||Numerical logic||Easy||1|
An attempt of about 4-5 questions in about 30 minutes at about 80-85% accuracy would be considered a good attempt.
According to IIFT 2018 results, a score of 46.94 was equivalent to 99.954 percentile, a score of 40.84 was equivalent to 99.612 percentile, a score of 37.66 was equivalent to 98.937 percentile, a score of 32.58 was equivalent to 95.865 percentile, and a score of 30.61 was equivalent to 93.545 percentile.
The 2018 cut-off for IIFT-Delhi and Kolkata campuses:
Male candidates: General: 32.25, OBC: 27.25, SC: 22.25, ST: 22.25, PwD: 22.25.
Female candidates: General: 30.25, OBC: 25.25, SC: 20.25, ST: 20.25, PwD: 20.25.