I passed the first test on rote memorization. The second was nearly the same. Only the third would have given information about my ability to estimate, which isn't enough to give real information about those 7 bullet points. I remain doubtful about the utility of these tests.
There is nothing, for example, which probes my experience with statistics.
Here's a more in-depth test. We run an medical experiment on lab rats. The protocol says that we will experiment on 20 rats, and that a mortality rate above 30% is too high so we must stop the experiment. After 5 rats, 2 have died. Should we stop the experiment now? Why or why not?
One could look at that and say that a 2/5=40%>30% so of course it should be stopped - it's higher than the allowed rate.
A better response is to point out that if 10% is acceptable, then there's a 0.9^3 * 0.1^2 * C(5,3) = 7% chance that this is an expected statistical fluctuation, and that the experimental protocols should have given some guideline on how certain one needs to be in knowing if the mortality rate was too high.
An even better response would be to point out that this means the first three rats lived, and it was only rats 4 and 5 which died, as otherwise the experiment would have stopped earlier under this protocol. In that case the possible experimental states are: 1) first rat died, so the experiment stopped = p. 2) first lived, second died, stop = p. 3) first lived, second lived, third died, stop = p. 4) first, second, third lived, fourth died, fifth lived = (1-p). and 5) first, second, third lived, fourth and fifth died = p giving (assuming I recall how to do this correctly) p+p+p+(1-p)+p = 1.0 or an estimated mortality rate of p=0.3.
In other words, this experiment is allowed to keep on going under the given protocol.
But this sort of modeling awareness is not present in the three tests you mentioned, despite being directly relevant, I assume, to what a trader does.