According to analysis from Wealth Data, there are 5,022 “surplus” advisers that have passed the exam but are no longer listed on the Financial Advisers Register (FAR).
The numbers follow the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) releasing the most recent exam results last week, which saw a total of 73 per cent of candidates passed the adviser exam in August, or 150 of the 205 candidates that sat the exam.
“As has been the practice for past exams, unsuccessful candidates will receive general feedback from ACER to highlight the curriculum areas where they have underperformed,” ASIC said.
The next exam sitting will be held on 9 November 2023, with enrolments to open on Monday, 2 October, and close on Friday, 20 October.
To date 20,718 individual candidates have sat the exam, of which over 19,172 (92 per cent) have passed.
Looking back at the pass rates for previous exam periods, Wealth Data found that there has been an appreciable uptick in the pass rate, with it sitting at just 52 per cent in August 2022.
“However, August 2022 was a very different time, with the majority of advisers sitting for the second time,” said Wealth Data founder Colin Williams.
“The last two sets of exams have produced very similar number in terms of the number of candidates, those sitting for the first time and the pass rates. Maybe this now becomes the norm for a while?”
The number of surplus advisers that have passed the exam has grown significantly, up by 1,201 from the 3,821 people that were eligible to practice but were not in August 2022.
“We are aware that many advisers passed the exam and still exited shortly afterwards. For example, this calendar year alone, 713 advisers have ceased on the ASIC FAR, all would have passed the exam,” Mr Williams added.
“Many are being replaced by advisers coming back into advice. However, we can see that there is a big opportunity to bring many more advisers back into advice.”
They’ve all become mortgage brokers giving ‘general advice’ for personal insurances.
[b]****ATTENTION IFA EDITORS****[/b]
Is it just me or is it [i]impossible [/i]to [b]click the ‘thumbs-up’ icon[/b] after each comment currently? Seems to have been like this for a few weeks now, anybody else noticed? Please advise if just me. Editors please advise or fix. Thank you.
Obviously they can make more money as an IntraFund Adviser or Business Development Manager than being buried with the Annual Fee Renewal Consent form red tape that is sending retail advisers broke.
The concept of ‘surplus advisers’ is hilarious! I doubt many of these former financial advisers have any intention of coming back. I know several of them who sat the exam because they wanted their exit to be on their own terms. They are glad to be out. Even if regulations were rolled back to pre-FSR days, they would not reappear; such is the mental scarring they endured from years of bullying and abuse from the regulator, media, dealer groups, FASEA, FOFA, LIF, Royal Commission witch hunt etc.
[b]Well said ‘Naive Much’!![/b]
I am one of those adviser of whom you speak – except I never saw a reason to do did the totally inappropriate[i] (especially for risk specialists)[/i] and hastily cobbled-together ridiculously labelled ‘ethics’ exam. Oh and the current 60% upfront remuneration isn’t helping attract ANYONE back to the industry under the shadow of heavier compliance, [b][i]unbelievable 2 year clawback periods[/i][/b] and the newly increased legal [i]risk of writing risk business [/i]which is what I wrote for 36 years. Nobody in their right mind would consider the stress these days for less than 100% upfront. Regarding commissions, simply, costs must be met and a business must be run – not a ‘commission grab’ as some less than seemly commenters may allude. A modern risk advice business absolutely cannot be run under these conditions. I watch with intense interest to see when the life companies will realize this – if indeed they still care about having risk advisers. Couldn’t make this idiocy and anti-adviser environment up if you tried!
I meet a young Gentleman last week who had completed and passed his studies and exam last year, but then decided it was easier to go work in a slightly different occupation. Starting wage 130K. He told me it was too risky to go into our field. I wonder how many more are in that situation?
People keep saying that advisers were leaving because of the FASEA exam, the educational requirements or some other reason. In simple terms it is a terrible job and if you had other options then you would take them and those people who were waiting for a magic wand from the QAR and Michelle Levy (which includes me) are now realising that nothing will get better.
What I got from this article is that 5,000 people are smarter than me.
Doesn’t sound like that to me at all John. If you’re OUT then YOU are the smart one.
Most likely 4990 compliance and 10 tech heads have sat the exam. That’s 1 auditor for every 4 Advisors… Sounds about right given the level of bad legislation and amount of corruption in the Australian Public service (ASIC/Treasury).
I’ll go back to completing a product manufacturer’s fee consent form that requires 3 signatures on it, that I can’t give to the client I’m seeing today because the anniversary date is tomorrow. Talk about setting me up for failure.