Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
lawyers weekly logo
Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
  • subs-bellGet the latest news! Subscribe to the ifa bulletin
Advertisement

Adviser exam pass rate lifts, but calls grow for ASIC transparency on benchmarks

The financial adviser exam pass rate has edged higher in the latest sitting, though frustration is mounting over the corporate regulator’s refusal to disclose the historical pass mark required to clear the test.

In the August sitting, 221 candidates sat the exam and 68 per cent passed, ASIC said.

That was an improvement on June’s 66 per cent, and well ahead of the 62 per cent recorded in August last year but remains below March’s 73 per cent and the recent high of 77 per cent in November 2024.

Almost three-quarters of August’s candidates were sitting the exam for the first time. Since its inception, some 22,153 people have taken the test, with 92 per cent successfully passing.

But candidates and industry figures say the lack of clarity around what constitutes a pass remains a major barrier.

Hannah Elliott of Stellar Wealth said ASIC needs to be upfront about the benchmark.

“ASIC needs to release the historical pass marks for the adviser exam. Despite repeated requests, they continue to avoid explaining why this information isn’t made available,” Elliott said.

 
 

“Candidates deserve clarity, and knowing the benchmark helps them prepare effectively and gives them direction when sitting practice exams.

“While ASIC has previously suggested the pass mark sits around 69 to 73 per cent, that’s speculation, not fact. It’s disappointing to see ASIC promote transparency across the industry yet apply a different standard when it comes to their own exam process.”

At the start of 2024, ASIC revised the exam structure, scrapping short-answer questions in favour of additional multiple-choice questions.

It also lifted restrictions that limited participation to new financial advisers with an approved degree or existing providers.

While those changes have eased entry pathways, pressure is now mounting on the regulator to apply the same transparency it demands of the industry to its own processes.