Only 42.7 per cent of the 496 advisers that sat the 17th financial advisers exam in May passed, the corporate regulator said in a statement on Monday.
According to ASIC, 72.2 per cent of candidates were resitting the May exam for at least the second time.
The result comes after 32.4 per cent of the candidates passed the February exam.
Unsuccessful candidates are set to receive general feedback from the Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER) to highlight the curriculum areas where they have underperformed.
To date 20,000 candidates have sat the exam, with the pass rate now at 91 per cent. The corporate regulator noted that this demonstrates “they have the skills to apply their knowledge of advice construction, ethics and legal requirements to the practical scenarios tested in the exam”.
Of those who have passed:
- Over 15,600 are recorded as current financial advisers on ASIC’s Financial Adviser Register (FAR), representing 93 per cent of current advisers on the FAR.
- Over 2,400 are ceased advisers on the FAR and may be re-authorised in the future.
- Over 600 were new to the industry.
- Over 3,250 unsuccessful candidates have re-sat the exam, with 68 per cent passing at a re-sit.
The next exam sitting of 2022 will be held from 28 July until 1 August 2022. Enrolments for the July sitting will be open from 20 June 2022 and close on 12 July 2022.
Importantly, ASIC reminded that Sitting 18 is the last opportunity for financial advisers who are operating under the nine-month exam extension to pass the exam. From 1 October 2022, all financial advisers must have passed the exam to continue to provide personal advice.
Does anyone know why the price of the exam has increased? Quite unethical if you ask me
I’m someone who passed this exam first sitting but must admit that there were far too many niche legal questions that had little to do with financial planning nor ethics. If someone didn’t know how to navigate the open book format and the legal texts, then that may be why they didn’t pass. Otherwise, the exam wasn’t too challenging (having studied the practice questions on the ACER website) and I finished an hour early fairly relaxed.
You cannot blame any regulators or bodies for the shocking pass rate we have seen over the past 4 sittings (incl. FASEAs final sitting). The exam is IDENTICAL to the ASIC and Kaplan resources available. At $1,000 a pop, ASIC will make a pretty penny from this whole process.
No it’s not! Not sure when you did the exam, but that’s not the case. If only it was that simple and if it was, don’t you think the pass rate would be much higher.
Sorry it is not the sentiment shared by many here, but the exam literally is the same. The only difference between the practice exams and questions from the most recent exam sitting was on restricted terms (and the Corps Act has a plethora of information regarding that), and the fee disclosure within an SOA. Learning to use Ctrl+F and having a general awareness of ethical behaviour, Standards and CoE is not hard. If an adviser, new or old, cannot effectively study or answer questions through process of elimination then they are not fit to advise clients.
sorry do not agree some old advisers have not sat real exams for forty years I have completed all kaplan training and kept up with CPD hours for all my years but failed first exam sitting with FASEA it left me some what shattered as i mature it has many others A bit of empathy would not go astray thanks
Great result. Congratulations to all.
Just another way for the big players to get rid of the small guy and own the market . ACCC ? Yeah Nah
Im a new entrant and have failed the exam 4 times. I have now left the industry. This would be one of the most ambiguous exams i have sat. Its unrealistic for ASIC/FASEA to think people who are fresh to the industry pass this exam. Especially with the resources availiable. Just my opinion.
Sorry to hear that, but it might be a blessing in disguise. Unless something drastic changes, this is not a good place to forge a career.
How sad that our industry has come to this. Once a upon a time, our job was enjoyable and rewarding – now it’s a compliance role that causes mental health issues. 9/10 advisers do the right thing and are good people.
999 out of 1000 do the right thing………….and pretty soon there will only be 1000 advisers left!!!!!
Yes my heart goes out to you as a new entrant it is a great industry but sadly has been slowly destroyed by idiot bureaucrats who seem to know how to be an adviser better than actual advisers, it is a sorry state of affairs
That’s tough mate, for sure, but that is what we want, a high bar set for all. Anyone unable to learn new concepts or cope with the pressure of an exam wouldn’t survive, let alone thrive, in this profession. I wish you luck and thank you for your interest, but upholding high standards is more important than just adding numbers in any profession.
Just wondering did you do the courses in legal framework and the ethics course? I found all the answers to the test were basically in those two subjects,
Can you provide more info on this course please. Thanks.
I did the two bridging courses run by kaplan fpc001b economic and legal context and fpc002b ethic and professionalism in fp. If I had not of done these two I would have had a much harder time in the exam that is for sure. There is a lot of crossover from these courses into the exam.
Thanks for that. Might be too late to enroll now?
Could be a blessing mate. There are better industries to focus on for employment, which offer more pay, more opportunity, less stress, less risk of losing your assets, less government intervention, better public perception, and more positive reporting from the media. Try find the positives in your adversity and you will win.
You have missed out on absolutely nothing by not being in this profession. Pretty much every other corporate profession has better reward/risk/long term upside than financial advice. Use those skills and get a job in tech sales for example. Transferrable skills and many 25 year olds are making $500k per annum doing this.
Next to the “40% pass rate” headline we see “Former adviser convicted for breaching ASIC banning order”.
You are Ethical or you are not Ethical………. it is not learned or examined.
It’s also not a hard exam, we should have stopped talking about it on 31/12/2021.
at one point with 80% of advisers being aligned to a product manufacturer I would debate that, ethical or you’re not.
Aligned or affiliated? There is a difference
The structure of the exam is a significant issue here. It should be one mark per correct answer, not multi-part multiple choice questions. I wonder how many people have been unsuccessful simply due to this ridiculous exam format. I also suggest that if an adviser fails this last attempt, that instead of effectively banning them from providing advice, that ASIC consider suspending existing advisers on 30 September 2022 if they haven’t passed the exam, and allow their reinstatement only when they do pass the exam, provided ongoing CPD is also maintained.
Well, according to the article, 93% of advisers registered have passed – so that leaves 7% who have yet to pass…
I read that as 93% of advisers currently on the register. Does not mention all that have left the industry (around 30% plus over the last 2 years) or been taken off due to this exam requirement.
Anyone who cannot pass this exam after getting 17 chances shouldn’t be advising anyone regarding their financial affairs.
And all to be a professional signature beggar.
Not a very constructive comment.
Although true
for 93% – perhaps not so much…
I would say signature chaser
Agreed
How dare you have to get consent to deduct fees from your clients money…
If you see yourself as a professional signature beggar, then maybe this is part of the problem
My clients are already advised at least 7 times PER ANNUM what they pay me. How many times is enough ?
LOL all it does is confuse the client as they think they’re paying multiple sets of fees, not signing multiple documents for the same fee. Its Absurd.
if you think clients signing forms 3-4 times to charge a fee, that they’ve told about multiple times, that often hasn’t been changed in years is appropriate I’d say you’re part of the problem. No doubt charging thousands for the privilege.
Not sure what you mean? I don’t beg for any signatures. In fact, as my business has EVOLVED with the times, these days we rarely do actual signatures, it’s all electronic. A concept we’ve had to learn an embrace to keep up with the times, not unlike how we learned the content and passed the FASEA exam to stay ahead of the game. This exam hasn’t been a test of knowledge, it’s been a test of who’s able to adapt and learn and grow.
No doubt this will prompt the usual indignation from the serial failers about how it’s not fair the examiners don’t tell them the precise answers they got wrong, and then repeat those same same questions again so they can pass via parroting rather than learning the concepts. They’ll also complain that any question not set within the context of their chosen technical specialty is irrelevant to them, even though the question isn’t testing technical knowledge it’s testing the application of law, ethics and consumer behaviour.
The good news is this may be the last time we have to hear this moaning, unless Stephen Jones caves in and provides an extension to the extension to the extension.
But 60% failed! And don’t blame the exam or the threshold ( or any other excuse ) because 91% of all advisers who have sat the exam have passed. At some point even the multitude of associations has to admit that some people don’t have what 2022 and beyond demands.
The “91% of all advisers who have sat the exam have passed” is an interesting statistic because that exceeds the number of advisers currently registered on the FAR by several thousand. It’s another perspective that articles should consider when reporting on how many have passed because many have passed and left the industry.
Maybe it should read 60% of advisers sitting flawed exam failed?
Why?
Maybe it should say 60% of advisers who have failed exam multiple times still allowed to provide advice to clients….thats the scary thing about that headline…
At what point does the nature and style of the exam become the issue – like what is the threshold? Its singularly the worst example of an exam I have seen in some 40 years in the workforce – some 20+ of those as a specialist trainer and examiner. But hey feedback like this is not part of the narrative.
At what point does the nature and style of those failing the exam become the issue….like what is the threshold?? How many times do you get at the exam before being told ‘enough, move along’ ??
The nature and style of the exam may have been an issue if there were very limited attempts and huge numbers were failing. But when you’ve had up to 10 attempts over 3 years available to do it, numerous coaching services available, and the vast majority of advisers passed it long ago at their first attempt, it’s just a weak excuse.
I’m guessing your experience as a trainer and examiner was in Cert IV courses and CPD quizzes for insurance sales reps? The FASEA exam and education requirements are a deliberate attempt to lift the standard above that level. It should be no surprise that the nature and style of the exam is more challenging.
Hey… I’m a Risk Only Adviser and passed the exam in 2019 and did it in 1 hour 40 mins, I choose specialize in Risk Insurance. Not all Financial Planning Sales Reps are bright Anon.
I’d like to see you do that now! No chance you’d pass – I guarantee you that!
Yachticus had a good point…just should have said it in 2019 when the exam first started, not in 2022.
What will the 13 associations make of this?
isn’t it 14 now.
I like seeing this comment continuous pop up. It shows people just going with the crowd rather than having something constructive to say.
Nothing like complaining about a post that isn’t constructive with a post that isn’t constructive. Thanks for the Monday afternoon chuckle.
how is complaining about a lack of representation or conflicted representation, or just incompetance, ever a bad thing?
How many are there? Has anyone ever counted them because I’d say it is more than 14 but can’t be bothered checking.
These Associations are like Industry super funds that continued to grow in numbers until they started to take each other over aka merge so same will happen in this space…