FASEA Exam Poll – Mixed Results


For those yet to pass the FASEA Adviser exam, which statement most closely reflects your status:

  • I will take the exam this year for the first time (39%)
  • I will re-sit the exam this year (18%)
  • I've finally decided not to take the exam (16%)
  • Still not sure (14%)
  • I never intended taking the exam (13%)

Our latest poll has delivered mixed results for those advisers yet to pass the FASEA exam.

As we go to print, a solid six advisers in 10 yet to pass will either take the exam for the first time this year (43 percent) or intend to re-sit the exam (17 percent).

On the other hand, around one adviser in four has either finally decided they will not be taking the exam (14 percent) or never intended taking it (12 percent), while 14 percent are still unsure what they will do.

FASEA has noted it is offering six sittings this year and to maximise the number of potential sittings an adviser may have, it’s encouraging advisers to book for early sittings. Advisers who sit either the January or March 2021 exams will have up to three sittings available to them.

For the 48 percent of advisers on ASIC’s Financial Adviser Register yet to pass the exam (see: 11,000+ Advisers Have Passed FASEA Exam), there’s also help available in preparing for the exam with one organisation offering masterclasses and another offering free exam preparation help (see: Help at Hand for Advisers Planning to Sit FASEA Exam).

If you haven’t already voted in our poll, what are your intentions? The poll remains open for another week and we’re still keenly interested to hear your views…


  1. Yep, FARCE-IA has said it is offering 6 sittings this year but never mention the resitting COST or the fact you can resit once you feel ready to resit and their artificial wait to resit which further stresses advisers. The exam is a sham, is designed to deceive with nebulous questions and double negatives to confuse. An exam on ethics is an oxymoron, an embarrassment and an insult to our once-great industry and the older advisers who built it and their clients.
    It is many of these older risk advisers who will be pushed out and away from their beloved industry and their clients simply because they may not handle intensely stressful classroom exam conditions or study regimes like younger advisers. AND because they are expected to measure up to an irrelevant and inappropriate educational level for the risk work they do. It is almost as if this exam ‘system’ is designed to CULL older advisers prior the 2024 qualifications apply. Where are the exams and qualifications for the risk/insurance industry? WHY are risk adviser forced to do exams and get qualifications that are totally askew, inappropriate and irrelevant to the risk work they do and have done admirably for decades? SOMEBODY PLEASE answer me this!
    Risk work is a completely different skill-set and knowledge-bank to full financial planning yet we are forced to measure up to the FP qualifications. Why don’t GP doctors have to study brain surgery?! As Pauline would say, “Please explain?” because none of these self-interested pollies or academics have adequately as yet!
    Where will these academics and politicians be when the life industry cannot support itself from new business – they will still have their cushy overpaid ‘trough-feeding’ jobs and paycheck every Friday. They have zero responsibility and maximum influence over events and conditions. There’s a term for that in 3rd world countries.

    • “Where are the exams and qualifications for the risk/insurance industry?“

      Ask an actuary.

      “Why don’t GP doctors have to study brain surgery?!”

      All doctors start out in hospitals and, after a number of years of experience, they choose a specialisation. But they need to be qualified before setting foot in a hospital.

      I agree with the trough though.

      • Thanks for the response Leeroy. I take issue with your doctor comment – an adviser with 30++ years experience HAS proven themselves and clearly shown skill in their specialised area of risk, if it can be shown they’ve never had a complaint – official or otherwise, has a good record of character and is held in high esteem by his or her peers. It is these RISK advisers being forced out by these extraneous, irrelevant and inappropriate qualifications being foisted upon us for no other reasons than ‘wokeness’ and political expediency.
        AND, yes, the governmental ‘pay trough’ is and probably always will be a disgusting, unfortunate and sinful plight upon society. How do you change this, I wonder, when politicians (all parties) can simply vote themselves a pay rise whenever they wish? Those in power NEVER relinquish it without a fight. This behaviour is an embarrassment to human kind.

        • Yet somehow the exam results indicate that advisers have a fairly poor understanding what acting in a clients best interest means.

Comments are closed.