CAT 2018 Analysis by TIME, CL, IMS: Likely Scores, Cut offs for 99 percentile

Register Now for Latest Update - Don't miss it

CAT Analysis by Expert
Tuesday, November 27 2018, 10:30 AM
The experts at well known CAT preparation centres for CAT 2018 namely T.I.M.E., Career Launcher, IMS India, have released their CAT 2018 Slot 1 and Slot 2 exam analysis as well as expected percentile cut offs at relative raw score in CAT exam. This article shares section wise and overall CAT 2018 analysis with cut offs as predicted by these top CAT preparation institutes.

CAT 2018 Slot 1 and Slot 2 exam has got over on November 25, 2018. We share below the CAT 2018 comprehensive analysis in detail by top CAT preparation Centres – T.I.M.E, CL, IMS. The CAT Analysis consists of following details:

  • CAT 2018 Analysis is presented separately for Slot 1 and Slot 2 and overall
  • The Detailed Analysis contains Overall and Section wise difficulty level, expected percentile viz-a-viz Raw Score in CAT 2018

CAT 2018 Slot 1 & Slot 2: Exam Composition
Both the slots in CAT 2018 had similar number of questions divided into MCQs with 1/3 negative marking and Non-MCQs without Negative marking:

Section
No.  Questions
No. of non-MCQ questions
Verbal Ability and Reading comprehension
34
7
Data Interpretation and Logical Reasoning
32
8
Quantitative Ability
34
12
Total
100
 27

CAT 2018 Slot 1 Analysis
The Slot 1 Analysis of CAT 2018 by T.I.M.E, CL and IMS is presented below:

Slot 1 Analysis by T.I.M.E.
Slot 1 of CAT 2018 didn't throw surprises but there were some changes, across sections.

  • Number of lengthy questions in QA have gone up
  • Order of the questions and the order of the options for various questions were different for different students
  • QA proved to be much tougher than expected compared to CAT 2017 due to the lengthy and involved nature of the questions.
  • VARC remained more or less at the same level and DILR a bit easier as compared to CAT 2017.
  • The cutoffs this year are expected to move marginally upwards, compared to CAT 2017.

Section -1: Verbal Ability & Reading Comprehension (VARC)

VARC Sections
Topics
Questions
Difficulty Level
Reading Comprehension
5 passages
24
Moderate
Verbal Ability
Para-Formation
4
Easy-Moderate
Para Odd Man Out
3
Moderate
Summary
3
Moderate-Difficult

Section-2: Data Interpretation & Logical Reasoning (DILR)

  • DILR difficulty level has gone down in CAT 2018 slightly.
  • Some of the DI sets were not difficult in terms of interpretation and the questions too in these sets were not tricky in nature.
Section
Topic
No. of Questions
Difficulty Level
Data Interpretation
N*N Matrix
4
Moderate
ATM Machine
4
Moderate+
Pie-Chart
4
Easy
Satellites
4
Difficult
Logical Reasoning
Committee
4
Moderate+
Pipes
4
Moderate
Institutes
4
Difficult
Exam ( diff sections )
4
Difficult

Section 3: Quantitative Ability (QA) Analysis

  • The number of questions on Geometry was on the higher side and some of them can be considered to be moderately difficult.
  • The difficulty level of this section can be classified as being slightly higher than moderate level
Topics
Sub topics
No. of Questions
Difficulty level
Geometry & Mensuration
 
7
Moderate
Numbers
 
2
Moderate+
Arithmetic
AMA, TW, CI, TD, P&L, Ratio, Equations
15
Moderate
Algebra
QE, Logs, Inequalities, Progressions, Coord. Geometry, Surds
7
Moderate+
P&C/venn diagrams
 
3
Moderate

Expected Cut off Percentile
85 is the minimum required sectional percentile in IIMs. T.I.M.E has shared following good attempts to score 85 percentile in each section in CAT 2018 slot 1 exam:

Section
Good Attempts
Expected Percentile
VARC
24
85
DILR
15
85
Quant
15
85

Slot 1 Analysis by Career Launcher (CL)
IIM-C kept its reputation intact, with its emphasis on the QA section. So, the break-up of the paper was as follows:

Section No. of Questions No. of non-MCQ questions Difficulty Level Good Attempts
Verbal Ability and Reading comprehension 34 7 Easy 28+
Data Interpretation and Logical Reasoning 32 8 Moderate 16+
Quantitative Ability 34 12 Difficult 15+
Total 100  27   60+

Let’s take a look at the three sections individually.

VERBAL ABILITY AND READING COMPREHENSION
VA&RC greeted students with an easier than expected paper. However, the pattern of the paper didn’t strictly match that of the sample paper provided by the CAT team. There were 34 questions with 7 Non-MCQ questions. There were no instructions provided for the number of questions in each passage. However there remained 5 passages. One passage had 4 questions (the passage on Genetics) while the rest had 5 questions each. The topics of the remaining RC passages were also from familiar areas. They were easy to read. There were quite a few inference-based questions, but these were easy to attempt. The options were not really very close. Only 4-5 questions from RC were tricky. However, a student should have followed the POE (process of elimination) to be able to achieve a decent accuracy rate as the options were not straight forward. The VA section had one major change. There were 4 Subjective Para Jumble questions, and all of these had 4 sentences each. There were 3 Odd sentence para-jumble questions. These questions were easier than expected. A student could have easily managed to get 4 questions correct out of the 7 PJs. These were TITA questions. The three summary questions were difficult. The paragraphs focused entirely on research methodology and academic concepts. So, they were difficult to read and comprehend. However, the options were not really difficult. So, any voracious reader would have been able to attempt these easily.  So, for many CAT aspirants this year (especially those who relied heavily on QA), VA may just turn out to be the saviour.

Major surprise: The para jumble questions were easy, and the sentences were really short.

Area
Topic
No. of Questions
Description
Reading Comprehension (24 Questions)
Reading Comprehension
24
There were 5 passages – All of them had similar word limit (around 500-550 words each). The passage on Genetics had four questions and it was slightly tedious to read. The other four passages came from familiar areas like India’s view on its legacy of Second World War, Plastic Pollution, Elephant society, and Consumer behaviour studies. Each of these had five questions. On an average, every passage had 1-2 inference based questions. The passage on 2nd World War would have been the easiest to attempt closely followed by the passage on plastic pollution. Options were not very tricky. A student could have attempted 20-21 questions easily with more than 85% accuracy.
Verbal Ability (10 Questions)
Para-jumble
4
All had four sentences each and the sentences were pretty easy and concise. As these had no negative marking, one should have attempted all without wasting a lot of time. However, two of these would be tricky to answer without options. The trick was to identify the opening sentence and go ahead with the mandatory pair. There were quite a few clue words. Prior practice and awareness of deductive paragraphs were the key.
Summary
3
The paragraphs were short (within 80 words each). However, these were really difficult to read, and the options became confusing because of the genres of the paragraphs. So, only one of these should have been attempted. These questions carried negative marks. 
Para-jumble (Odd sentence out)
3
The question (the one on bumblebee) had an incomplete sentence. This coupled with the PJ on erosion would have been difficult. The other question was a sitter.

DATA INTERPRETATION AND LOGICAL REASONING
The next section was DILR. After three consecutive tragedies, DILR-2018 must have been a pleasant surprise. There were 32 questions in total with 8 Non-MCQ questions. Unlike last year’s paper, the theme of the sets was more conventional. With smart selection, around 4 sets in the section could have been attempted very easily with good accuracy. A couple of sets had 1 ‘difficult to crack’ question each. And a student should have been wise enough to leave these aside. Calculation wasn’t required at all in the DI sets. On the other hand, the LR sets were easy-moderate in terms of level of difficulty.

Section  Topic  No. of Questions  Doable
Data Interpretation Pie Chart-Annual/half yearly/Quarter Sales-Moderate 4 4
ATM -Denominations of 100,200 and 500-Moderate 4 2-Jan
Set Theory-1600 rockets were launched-Moderate 4 2-Jan
Logical Reasoning Matrix-Adjacent cells-Easy 4 3-Feb
10 friends -scores in DI/WE/GK- Difficult 4 2-Jan
4 Females ,4 Males-Minor and major-Easy 4 4
3 Committees-research/teaching/economist – moderate 4 3-Feb
  1-20 petrol pumps-Moderate 4 3-Feb

Overall,15-17 attempts, with accuracy of 90% would be considered good.

QUANTITATIVE APTITUDE:
At the end, came the real star of the show, the ‘infamous IIM-C QA’. For students who were already scared of this section, it could have felt like a nuclear disaster. However, for the ‘engineering-dominated’ group, this was not impossible to attempt. The questions were calculation and logic intensive, not theory intensive. There were 34 questions of QA with 12 Non-MCQ questions. It was arguably the toughest QA section in the last four years. The questions were designed to test the grasp of basic fundamentals of the concepts. Arithmetic and Geometry questions dominated the section. In some of MCQs, options were very confusing to get the answer. Number System and Logarithm each had at least 2 questions.

Section Topic No. of Questions Doable
Quantitative Ability Number System 2 2
Algebra 8 5-Apr
Arithmetic 14 7-Jun
Modern Math 3 2
Geometry and Mensuration 7 4-Mar

An overall attempt of 18-20 with 85% accuracy would be very good.

Overall Percentile in Slot-1

  • Overall, a 99 percentile score could reduce by about 15-18 marks as compared to last year.
  • Thus, a score of 150-155 should fetch a 99 percentile.

Please Note: All information on analysis and scores are based on the accuracy of attempts provided by you as well as independent analysis and evaluation made by Career Launcher Academic Team. We do not take responsibility for any decision that might be taken, based on this information.

This CAT 2018 Slot 1 Analysis is written by Mr Gautam Bawa (Group Product Head, Career Launcher). He holds a Master’s Degree from IIM Calcutta with CAT percentile of 99.97 in 2011.

Slot 1 Analysis by IMS

Section 1: VARC

  • The overall difficulty level of VA RC Section of CAT 2018 was easier than CAT 2017.
  • A few questions were direct and very easy - about 6 questions. Inferential questions were first step inferences and were easy to medium.
  • There were about 5 questions in RC, which looked like Critical Reasoning (or Application) questions.  
  • The passages were also longer. The length of the passages varied from 450 words to 800 words.
  • Another major deviation was in the Paragraph Jumbles Questions. 4 sentences to rearrange instead of 5 made the 4 Paragraph Jumbles questions refreshingly easy.
  • Of the 10 VA questions 7 were TITA and 3 were MCQs.
  • 3 Out-of-context sentence – TITA
  • 4 Paragraph Jumbles – TITA
  • 3 Paragraph summary/Author’s opinion questions – MCQs. (With negative Marks)
Area / Questions
No of Qs.
Type
LOD
Reading Comprehension
24
MCQ
 (Overall: Easy to Medium)
RC-1:  Happiness and Economics.  Approx. 500 words
5
MCQ
Easy – Medium  
RC- 2: Human elephant relationship  Approx. 500 words
5
MCQ
Easy
RC-3: Absence of WWII memorials in India
Approx. 500 words
5
MCQ
Easy
RC-4: Problem of single use plastic. Approx. 800 words
5
MCQ
Easy
RC-5: Influence of parental gene in mice. – Approx. 600 words
4
MCQ
Medium
Verbal Ability
10
MCQ & TITA
 Overall: Easy to Medium
Parajumbles ( 4 sentences)  
4
TITA
2 Medium 2 Easy
Out of Context sentence
3
TITA
1 Easy 2 Medium
Summary
3
MCQ
1 Easy 1 Medium 1 Difficult

Section-2: DILR

  • The DI-LR section had a total of 8 sets with 4 questions in each set.
  • There were 3 sets of Data Interpretation and 4 sets of Logical Reasoning while 1 set was a combination of DI and LR.
  • There were 4 easy sets, 2 easy to moderate and 2 difficult sets.
  • Some of the sets were time consuming as they had questions which had additional information to be taken into account while solving. So Selection of the right sets to solve was key to a good performance in this section.
  • Some of the sets that could have been definitely solved were the ones based on the multi layered  pie chart ,committee selection, magic square and  arrangement of 8 students (4 males and 4 females).
  •  Just like last year, no Set was completely TITA - the TITA questions were dispersed across 4 individual sets with 2 TITA each. 4 sets were completely MCQ.
  • There were a total of 8 TITA questions
Set No.
Area
Set Description
Number of Questions
Level of Difficulty
Question Type
1
Data Interpretation - Calculation Based
Multi-layered  pie chart based on  LED sales of Electronics outlet for 2 years.
4
Easy
MCQ
2
Data Interpretation - Reasoning Based
Satellite - Venn Diagram
4
 Difficult
MCQ
3
Logical Reasoning - Arrangement Based
Contamination Details of 20 pipelines
4
Easy-Moderate
MCQ
4
Logical Reasoning - ArrangementBased
8 Students (4 Males+4 Females) to be arranged across 4 parameters
4
Easy
   MCQ
5
Logical Reasoning - Grouping & Conditionalities
Committee Selection(Research,Administration, Teaching)
4
Easy
MCQ+TITA
6
Data Interpretation -Reasoning Based
ATM Money disbursal
4
 Difficult
MCQ+TITA
7
Data Interpretation -Reasoning Based
Written Test Marks in 3 subjects
4
Easy-Moderate
MCQ + TITA
8
Logical Reasoning - Puzzle Based
Magic Square (n*n matrix)
4
Easy
MCQ+TITA

Section-3: Quantitative Ability (QA)

  • QA section was moderate to difficult. As per student feedback it seems to be amongst the toughest QA section in recent years.
  • This section was dominated by Arithmetic with 14 questions  followed by Modern Math with 10 questions, Geometry with 6, with a couple of questions from Algebra and Numbers each.
  • There were 12 TITA questions this year
  • There were only 8 to 10 sitters for the taking while 6-8 questions that made students sweat.
Area
Topic
No. of Questions
Total No. of Questions
Level of Difficulty
Numbers
Indices
1
2
Moderate
Reverse number
1
Moderate
Algebra
Quadratic Equations
1
2
Easy-Moderate
High Degree Equations
1
Moderate
Arithmetic
Ratios & Percentage
2
14
Easy
Averages
2
Moderate
Time-Speed-Distance
3
Easy-Moderate
Profit & Loss
1
Moderate-Difficult
Mixture & Alligation
2
Easy-Moderate
Work & Time
2
                  Easy-Moderate
Compound interest (Annual installment)
1
Moderate
Pipes & Cisterns
1
Easy-Moderate
Geometry
Circles
2
6
Easy-Moderate
Parallelogram
1
Moderate
Rectangle
1
Easy
Mensuration - Cone & Frustum
1
Easy
Square
1
Moderate-Difficult
Modern Math
Logarithm
3
10
Moderate
Sequence & Series (AP & GP)
2
Easy-Moderate
Functions
2
Easy-Moderate
Set theory
2
Easy
P & C
1
Moderate
 
TOTAL
34
34
 

Expected Cut off Percentile: Slot 1

Section Wise

Section
Good Attempts & Accuracy Level
Expected Percentile
VARC
28-30 (With 80% Accuracy)
95-99
DILR
18-20 (With 85% Accuracy)
95-99
Quant
19-21 (With 85% Accuracy)
95-99

Overall

Total Good Attempts in Slot 1
Accuracy Percent
Expected Overall Percentile in Slot 1
68-70
85%
95-99

CAT 2018 Slot 2 Analysis by T.I.M.E., CL, IMS
CAT Slot 2 Exam 2018 has been reported as bit more difficult than the morning slot of CAT 2018. The detailed analysis for Slot-2 with expected cut off percentile score is shared below:

Slot 2 Analysis by T.I.M.E

  • No Surprise in the second slot of CAT 2018
  • Overall, it turned out to be slightly tougher than the morning slot
  • While the VARC section was more or less at the same difficulty level as that of the morning slot, the bump up in the difficulty level is largely on the back of relatively tougher DILR and Quant sections.

Section 1: VARC Analysis

  • VARC section in Slot 2 saw a marginal increase in the difficulty level of the RC section compared to CAT 2017. The RC passages were from topics on Biology, Environment, Sociology, Science.
  • In VA, the Para Formation Questions were simpler compared to those of CAT 2017.
  • Same Question pattern as that of Morning slot was repeated
  • The passages were not too straight forward to read
  • The VA questions, on Para Formation/Para Odd-One-out were quite simple to crack
  • The Odd-One-Out questions were relatively easy to crack and so were the Para Summary Questions.
Area
Topic
No. of Qs
Difficulty level
Reading Comprehension
5 passages
24
Moderate
Verbal Ability
Para-Formation Questions
4
Moderate
Para-Formation Odd Man Out
3
Moderate
Para Summary
3
Moderate

Section 2: DILR

  • The difficulty level of this section was slightly higher than the difficulty level in the morning slot.
  • There were relatively easier sets such as the one with ‘room numbers’ and the one with ‘profitability and market share’ which should have been solved comfortably.
  • Most of the sets were found to be lengthy and time-consuming.
  • Some of them were quite difficult to comprehend, owing to the depth of reasoning involved.
Area
Topic
No. of Qs
Difficulty level
Data Interpretation
Square chart
4
Difficult
Profitability and Market share
4
Moderate
Currency conversion
4
Difficult
B-School grading
4
Difficult
Logical Reasoning
Coding - Decoding
4
Difficult
Platinum – gold tickets
4
Difficult
Room Numbers and timings
4
Easy
Venn Diagrams
4
Moderate-Difficult

Section 3: Quantitative Ability Analysis

  • The Quant section had 22 MCQs and largest number of 12 questions of non-MCQ type.
  • The low weightage trend for Numbers continued this year in the afternoon slot as well.
  • Arithmetic was heavily favoured. There were a good number of questions from Geometry and Mensuration.
  • The difficulty level of this section can be classified as being moderate to difficult level.
Topic
Description
No. of Qs
Difficulty level
Geometry& Mensuration
 
6
Moderate+
Numbers
 
4
Moderate
Arithmetic
AMA, TW, CI, TD,P&L, RPV, Equations
14
Moderate+
Algebra
QE, Logs, Inequalities,Functions
8
Difficult
Miscellaneous
 
2
Difficult

Expected Percentile Cut offs

Section
Good Attempts
Expected Percentile
VARC
23
85
DILR
12
85
Quant
12
85

Slot 2 Analysis by Career Launcher (CL)
Students who went into the second slot expecting a similar paper as that of the first slot (or for that matter the CAT 2017 paper) were on the right track. It too started with an ‘easy’ VARC section. The passages were on similar lines as those of the first slot. The DILR section continued to give a sigh of relief to the students. However, some are of the opinion that it was slightly tougher than the first slot’s DILR section. Overall, it was of a moderate level of difficulty. And the reign of QA continued. It remained the toughest section in the second slot too.

The break-up of the paper was as follows:

Section No. of Questions No. of non-MCQ questions Difficulty Level Good Attempts
Verbal Ability and Reading comprehension 34 7 Easy 28+
Data Interpretation and Logical Reasoning 32 8 Moderate 16+
Quantitative Ability 34 12 Difficult 15+
Total 100  27   60+

Let’s take a look at the three sections individually.

VERBAL ABILITY AND READING COMPREHENSION
VARC continued to be ‘the feel good’ section. The pattern remained the same as that of the first slot. There were 34 questions with 7 Non-MCQ questions. There were no instructions provided for the number of questions in each passage. However there remained 5 passages. One passage had 4 questions (the passage on ‘Grover snails’) while the rest had 5 questions each. The topics of the remaining RC passages were also from familiar areas. They were easy to read. There were quite a few inference-based questions, but these were easy to attempt, thanks to the option choices. The options were not really very close. Only 4-5 questions from RC were tricky. However, a student should have followed the POE (process of elimination) to be able to achieve a decent accuracy rate as the options were not straight forward. The VA section had one major change. There were 4 Subjective Para Jumble questions, and all of these had 4 sentences each. There were 3 Odd sentence para-jumble questions. These questions were easier than expected. A student could have easily managed to get 4 questions correct out of the 7 PJs (PJ and OSPJ) These were TITA questions. The three para-summary questions were of moderate level of difficulty. The paragraphs continued to be short in the range pf 450 to 500 words each. However, as compared to the first slot, the summary questions were slightly easier. Only one summary question appeared to be tough. So, VARC continued to be the ‘easiest’ of the lot.

Area Topic No. of Questions Description
Reading Comprehension Reading Comprehension 24 There were 5 passages – All of them had similar word limit (around 450-500 words each). The passage on Grover Snails had four questions. The other four passages came from familiar areas like Meritocracy and diversified teams, use of technology in essential services, rings of Saturn and their age, and a passage on human resource and learning. Each of these had five questions. On an average, every passage had 1-2 inference-based questions. The passage on white-lipped shelled snails would have been the easiest to attempt closely followed by the passage on essential services and technology. From the remaining passages, one was slightly tough to read. Options were not very tricky. A student could have attempted 20-21 questions easily with more than 85% accuracy.
(24 Questions)
Verbal Ability Para-jumble 4 All had four sentences each and the sentences were pretty easy and concise. As these had no negative marking, one should have attempted all without wasting a lot of time. However, two of these would be tricky to answer without options. The trick was to identify the opening sentence and go ahead with the mandatory pair. There were quite a few clue words. Prior practice and awareness of deductive paragraphs were the key.
(10 Questions) Summary 3 The summary paragraphs were easier as compared to those of the first slot. The paragraphs were short and slightly difficult to read. However, only one summary question can be called difficult.  
  Para-jumble (Odd sentence out) 3 The questions were tricky, especially the one with the bird songs. This coupled with the PJ on business elites would have been difficult. The other question was a sitter.

DATA INTERPRETATION AND LOGICAL REASONING
The second section of the paper DILR continued to be a pleasant surprise. There were 32 questions in total with 8 Non-MCQ questions. Unlike last year’s paper, the theme of the sets was more conventional. There was one very direct DI set with basic calculations. The focus and strategy should have been the quality of the selected sets rather the quantity of the numbers of questions attempted. A couple of sets did have a question each which should have been ‘left alone’. Two sets included calculation but none was on the tougher side. On the other hand, the LR sets were easy-moderate in terms of level of difficulty.

Section  Topic  No. of Questions  Doable
Data Interpretation Currency Exchange and rate changes 4 3-Feb
Smartphones and market share 4 4
Box Diagram of 3 companies/products 4 2-Jan
Logical Reasoning Interview Arrivals (Arrangement) 4 4-Mar
Coding (Alphabet/digits) 4 3-Feb
Set theory (3 games, Ludo, Kho-kho, Gilli Danda) 4 2
Institute Accreditation 4 3-Feb
  Tickets to a show, old, young and middle aged people 4 3-Feb

Overall,15-17 attempts, with accuracy of 90% would be considered good.

QUANTITATIVE APTITUDE:
Once the QA section is over, students would have come out with much less satisfaction as they would have had they come out at the end of DILR! If you expected a happy ending in QA, you were definitely not paying attention to all the discussions following the first slot. IIM-C and its love for a tough QA section continued in the second slot too. The questions were calculation and logic intensive, not theory intensive. There were 34 questions of QA with 12 Non-MCQ questions. It was arguably the toughest QA section in the last four years. The focus of the aptitude questions continued to be on testing the fundamental knowledge of the students and their clarity of concepts. Arithmetic and Geometry questions dominated the section. In some of MCQs, options were very confusing to get the answer. Number System and Logarithm each had at least 2 questions.

Section Topic No. of Questions Doable
Quantitative Ability Number System 2 1
Algebra 9-Aug 5-Apr
Arithmetic 13-14 9-Aug
Modern Math 3 2-Jan
Geometry and Mensuration 7 4-Mar

An overall attempt of 18-20 with 85% accuracy would be very good.

Overall Percentile

  • Overall, a 99 percentile score could reduce by about 15-18 marks as compared to last year.
  • Thus, a score of 150-155 should fetch a 99 percentile.

Please Note: All information on analysis and scores are based on the accuracy of attempts provided by you as well as independent analysis and evaluation made by Career Launcher Academic Team. We do not take responsibility for any decision that might be taken, based on this information.

This CAT 2018 Slot 2 Analysis is written by Mr Arks Srinivas (National Head MBA Prep – India and Abroad). He holds a Master’s Degree from IIM Calcutta.

Slot 2 Analysis by IMS

  • Level of difficulty in Slot 2 is on par with the level of difficulty of Slot 1 for the VARC and DILR sections
  • There is a marginal difference in the difficulty level of the QA section in both slots. 
  • The QA Section was reported as difficult in comparison to that of the QA section of the CAT of recent years.

Section 1: VARC Analysis

Area / Questions
No of Qs.
Type
LOD
Reading Comprehension
24
MCQ
Overall Easy to Medium
RC-1:  Evolution of white lipped snails  Approx.-  550 words
4
MCQ
Easy
RC- 2: Saturn’s rings and several of its moons –Approx.  600 words
5
MCQ
Easy to Medium
RC-3: Evaluation based on metric fixation-  Approx. 500 words
5
MCQ
Easy
RC-4: Access of the poor to government Services   – Approx. 700 words
5
MCQ
Easy to Medium
RC-5:  – Fallacy of Meritocracy- Approx. 650 words. (The same passage was a part of SimCAT6)
5
MCQ
Easy to Medium
Verbal Ability
10
MCQ & TITA
Overall Easy to Medium
Parajumbles
4
TITA
4 Easy
Out of Context sentence
3
TITA
2 Easy 
1 Medium
Summary
3
MCQ
1 Easy 
2 Medium

Section 2: DILR Analysis

  • The Data Interpretation and Logical Reasoning section was one notch easier than the one in CAT-2017.
  • No Set was completely TITA - TITA questions were dispersed across individual sets.
  • 4 sets were completely MCQ whereas the remaining 4 sets was a combination of TITA and MCQs ( 2 MCQ and 2 TITA). There were a total of 8 TITA questions
Set No.
Area
Set Description
Number of Questions
Level of Difficulty
Question Type
1
Data Interpretation
Venn diagram set on students playing 3 games
4
Moderate -Difficult
MCQ+TITA
2
Data Interpretation
Profitability of the products launched by three companies
4
Difficult
MCQ
3
Data Interpretation
Sales and profits on four smartphone handsets
4
Easy
MCQ
4
Data Interpretation
Exchange rate of three currencies and buying and selling of the three currencies
4
Moderate
MCQ+TITA
5
Logical Reasoning
Coding
4
Difficult
MCQ
6
Logical Reasoning
Arrangement set involving students facing interviews in three rooms
4
Easy-Moderate
MCQ
7
Logical Reasoning
Accreditation of 8 educational institutes
4
Moderate
MCQ + TITA
8
Logical Reasoning
Set on tickets of a monument
4
Easy-Moderate
MCQ+TIT

Section 3: Quantitative Ability Analysis

  • This section was on the difficult side and dominated by Arithmetic with 14 questions followed by Geometry and Modern Maths with 6 questions each, Algebra with 5 questions and Numbers with 3 questions.
  • There were 12 TITA questions this year - compared to last year when there were 11
  • The level of difficulty of this section was one notch higher than last year.
  • Many of the questions in this section tested multiple concepts.
Area
Topic
No. of questions
Total No. of questions
Level of Difficulty
Arithmetic
Mixtures & Alligations
4
14
2 Easy, 1 Medium, 1 Difficult
 
Time-Speed-Distance
3
1 Easy, 1 Medium, 1 Difficult
 
Work, Pipe & Cisterns
2
2 Medium
 
Averages
2
2 Medium
 
Ratio
1
1 Easy
 
Time & Work
1
1 Easy
 
Simple & Compound Interest
1
1 Difficult
Geometry
Quadrilaterals
2
6
1 Easy, 2 Medium, 3 Difficult
 
Circles
2
 
Triangle + Circle
1
 
Co-ordinate Geometry
1
Modern Maths
Logarithms
3
6
Medium to Difficult
 
P & C
1
Medium
 
AP-GP
1
Medium
 
Set Theory
1
Easy
Algebra
Maxima-Minima
2
5
1 Medium, 1 Difficult
 
Inequalities
2
2 Medium
 
Miscellaneous
1
1 Medium
Numbers
Surds & Indices
1
3
Easy
 
Miscellaneous
2
Easy - Medium

Expected Percentile Cut offs

Section
Good Attempts
Expected Percentile
VARC
26-30 (With 80% Accuracy)
95-99
DILR
18-20 (With 85-90% Accuracy)
95-99
Quant
18-20 (With 85-90% Accuracy)
95-99

Overall Analysis & Cut offs

  • CAT 2018 Slot-1 and Slot-2 had a marginal difference in their difficulty level
  • Quant in Slot 2 was rated slightly more difficult than Slot 1 exam
  • A few questions in DILR were rated a little more difficult.
  • VARC has remained easy in both the slots

Expected Cut Offs
Overall cut offs for CAT 2018 by T.I.M.E., CL, IMS are shared below:

CAT 2018 Percentile Cut offs by T.I.M.E.
Slot wise and Overall CAT 2018 percentile cut offs by T.I.M.E. are:

Slot 1 Sectional Cutoff Score

Percentile
VARC
DILR
QA
85
46 ± 1
25 ± 1
25 ± 1
95
59 ± 1
35 ± 1
41 ± 1
99
70 ± 1
52 ± 1
50 ± 1

Slot 1 Overall Cutoff Score

Percentile Overall
97.5 134 ± 2
99 148 ± 2

Slot 2 Sectional Cutoff Score

Percentile VARC DILR QA
85 45 ± 1 23 ± 1 22 ± 1
95 58 ± 1 33 ± 1 38 ± 1
99 69 ± 1 48 ± 1 49 ± 1

Slot 2 Overall Cutoff Score

Percentile Overall
97.5 126 ± 2
99 140 ± 2

CAT 2018 Percentile Cut offs by Career Launcher (CL)

Overall Score in Slot 1 Slot 1: Expected Percentile Overall Score in Slot 2 Slot 2: Expected Percentile
150-155 99 150-155 99

CAT 2018 Percentile Cut offs by IMS
IMS has predicted following CAT percentile cut offs at different range of scores:

Percentile VA-RC Score DI-LR Score QA Score Overall Score
85% 40 to 41 28 to 29 25 to 26 90 to 95
90% 45 to 46 32 to 33 29 to 30 95 to 100
95% 50 to 51 38 to 39 35 to 36 105 to 110
97 to 98% 54 to 55 46 to 47 44 to 45 120 to 125
99% 58 to 60 50 to 52 48 to 50 140 to 145

Stay tuned to MBAUniverse.com for more updates on CAT 2018 exam Analysis