Basically, fundamental analysis involves looking at a particular company, while technical analysis only looks at the company's stock price, or the stock market overall. While a fundamental analyst looks at financial statements to see if XYZ is selling products, making a profit, increasing shareholder equity, etc., a technical analyst couldn't care less about the company itself. A technical analyst just wants to see where XYZ's stock has been trading and figure out where it's headed next by looking at volume, charts, moving averages, etc. A fundamental analyst doesn't try to determine what a company's stock is going to do over the short-term. Instead, a fundamental analyst tries to buy an ownership stake in a great company that should grow in value over time. Price-to-earnings, price-to-book, dividend payout ratios, profit margins, etc. are concerns of the fundamental analyst. Support, resistance, breakouts, volume, and moving averages are concerns of the technical analyst. If he studies data on a company's financials, he's a fundamental analyst. If he studies market data on the company's stock price, he's a technical analyst.
Which one is more likely to lead to profits?
That's way beyond the scope of the exam, assuming anyone could answer the question in the first place. But I kind of like the results that Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger, Peter Lynch, and the "Motley Fools" have shown with fundamental analysis. A successful technical analyst? He'd probably be glad to sell you a once-in-a-lifetime-educational-opportunity that will show you how to earn millions trading the stock market for just $3,999.99.