Exam not unfair to specialist advisers: FASEA

In its statement to the Senate economics legislation committee on Thursday, FASEA said it noted “recent media commentary suggesting the exam is not appropriate for specialist advisers and is too difficult for them to pass”.

The comments come following criticism from the Stockbrokers and Financial Advisers Association in March that some sittings of the exam have been too narrowly focused on specialist areas such as insurance, reflecting a failure to recognise the multidisciplinary nature of the industry.

“Consistent with the requirements of the Corporations Act, the exam is set as a core competency test applicable to advisers in their role as a relevant provider and is not a specialist exam,” the standards authority told the committee.

“The current exam pass rate of 89 per cent overall demonstrates the exam is achievable for relevant providers regardless of their advice specialty.”

FASEA said a total of 1,437 advisers had been unsuccessful when sitting the exam, and 882 of those had come back for a second try.

Of those who had resat the exam, 578 advisers, or around 66 per cent, had subsequently passed, the standards authority said.

However, data retained by FASEA around the advisers’ employment did not indicate that more specialist practitioners had the deck stacked against them when it came to passing the exam.

“Analysis of the composition of the 1,437 who have been unsuccessful in passing the exam to date does not demonstrate a disadvantage between generalist financial planners and specialist financial advisers, with a split of approximately 60/40 per cent respectively composing those who had failed,” the standards authority said.