Its not that hard. At the lowest level course (which was covered in 10 weeks) we did all of Rudin, the first two chapters of Stein functional analysis and first two chapters of Stein Fourier analysis, which means things like Hilbert Space, dual space, orthogonality,… and all the convergent results in Fourier series. There were around 45 of us. The median student was a second year undergrad. Average grade was like 90%, exam difficulty is at level of the problems in Rudin/ Stein.
I find it funny that economists struggle with these things (or at least those on this site). The ability to do these low level maths doesnt signal anything. And yet most people here struggle with it. Some even decide to do a PhD in political science just because they are terrified at the idea of taking real analysis. Others are less extreme and choose to attend the course rather than taking for credit.
To be honest, while people on this site like to make fun of engineer/ medical students, I never heard of them complaining about the maths. In fact there were more engineers in my class taking analysis for fun, than economists who truly needed it for the admission. Story is the same even for classes that seem totally irrelevant to engineers like number theory
No wonder economics is dying and none is taking it seriously anymore. Most people are not passionate about research at all. At this point you guys are just bunch of 1d10t chasing prestige.
I seriously dont understand Ejmr’s obsession with real analysis


You have zero understanding of what most Economics research is focused on these days if you think Real Analysis is crucial to research. Those who need it for their theory papers or whatever take it, those who do Applied Econ 101 can skip it.
Btw, engineers mostly hate and/or have no understanding of real analysis. I'm an engineer myself and in math courses everyone either 1) memorized the proofs or 2) skipped to the part where you actually applied the math. Engineers mostly care about realworld applications and building stuff, not formal logic and theoremproving.

Next someone will post "I don't understand EJMR's obsession with giving gift cards while on the job market."
Lo, how the mighty have fallen.Yeah it's a meme, OP, you gullible maroon
Susan Athey said real analysis is a must for PhD application. She must be taking part in your meme game right?

The median student is a sophomore and youre doing functional analysis? Why would you come to a forum just to tell an obvious lie?
Well, in France, we started Measure Theory in our first year. Then, we take Functional and Harmonic Analysis in the sophomore year.
It takes you guy a whole year to do Measure theory?
Here for the median maths student it would be like (I am talking about the median, not a star)
First year: calculus, algebra,… all easy stuff
Second year: analysis sequence which comprises of real analysis, then measure theory, finally complex analysis. Some takes functional analysis as well (it is a separate course and not included in the sequence). There is another sequence in topology which is compulsory for maths major. I did a maths minor so never bothered with it.
Third year: PhD courses
Final year: research, start to publish paper.
The star students (imo type) wouldnt bother with the first year.
Check out Princeton 325. Lots of second year undergrads take that course. I am at a school slightly below Princeton in maths (U Chicago, Caltech, Berkeley, CMU,…).