CPH — CSI Conduct and Practices Handbook Exam Blueprint
Independent exam blueprint for the Canadian Securities Institute CSI Conduct and Practices Handbook (CPH) exam, focused on conduct, KYC, suitability, accounts, trading, supervision, compliance, and final review readiness.
How to Use This Exam Blueprint
Use this checklist as a practical study map for the Canadian Securities Institute CSI Conduct and Practices Handbook (CPH) exam, code CPH. The exam is conduct-focused, so readiness is less about memorizing isolated definitions and more about choosing the compliant action when a client, representative, account, product, order, or complaint creates a decision point.
For each topic area, ask:
- Can I identify the client protection issue?
- Can I distinguish what is permitted, prohibited, discretionary, documented, disclosed, approved, or escalated?
- Can I apply KYC, KYP, suitability, conflict, supervision, and communication rules to a short scenario?
- Can I choose the best answer when more than one response sounds reasonable?
This is an independent exam blueprint for exam preparation. It is not an official Canadian Securities Institute outline and does not claim exam weights or scoring rules.
Topic-area readiness table
| Readiness area | What to review | You are ready when you can… | Fast self-test |
|---|---|---|---|
| Professional conduct and regulatory expectations | Fair dealing, honesty, integrity, client priority, regulatory purpose, firm policies, representative obligations | Identify the conduct principle behind a scenario, not just the rule label | If the client benefits but the process is improper, is the action still acceptable? |
| Client relationship lifecycle | Prospecting, account opening, relationship disclosure, ongoing updates, account changes, termination or transfer | Place each obligation at the correct stage of the relationship | What must be done before the first recommendation or trade? |
| Know Your Client / client due diligence | Identity, personal and financial facts, investment objectives, time horizon, risk tolerance, risk capacity, investment knowledge, liquidity needs | Spot missing or stale client facts and know when to pause, update, document, or escalate | Which facts would change a suitability conclusion? |
| Know Your Product | Product structure, risks, costs, liquidity, complexity, conflicts, compensation, target investor, issuer or market risks | Explain why a product is or is not appropriate for a specific client | What product facts must be understood before recommending it? |
| Suitability and account appropriateness | Recommendations, accepted orders, unsolicited orders, leverage, concentration, risk mismatch, account type fit | Match the recommendation to the client profile and identify when “client wants it” is not enough | Would this recommendation still make sense if the market moves against the client? |
| Conflicts of interest | Material conflicts, compensation, referral arrangements, outside activities, gifts, personal trading, related issuers, competing duties | Decide whether to avoid, disclose, manage, obtain approval, or refuse the activity | Does disclosure alone solve the conflict? |
| Account types and authority | Individual, joint, corporate, trust, estate, registered, cash, margin, discretionary, managed, trading authorization, power of attorney | Determine who can give instructions and what documentation or approval is needed | Can a spouse, assistant, executor, trustee, or attorney trade without authority on file? |
| Order handling and trading practices | Solicited vs. unsolicited, discretionary trading, order priority, best execution concepts, trade errors, allocations, short sales, restricted securities, market integrity | Identify unfair, manipulative, unauthorized, or undocumented trading conduct | Is the representative making a decision the client must make? |
| Communications and disclosure | Advertising, research, recommendations, social media, performance claims, statements, confirmations, fees, risks, relationship disclosure | Distinguish balanced, approved, documented communication from misleading promotion | Would a reasonable client understand the risk, cost, and limitation? |
| Complaints and dispute handling | Recognizing complaints, reporting internally, timelines under firm policy, client communication, settlement authority, documentation | Know when to escalate and avoid private settlements or informal suppression | Is this “just feedback” or a reportable complaint? |
| AML, privacy, confidentiality, and vulnerable-client concerns | Identity red flags, source of funds, suspicious activity indicators, sanctions screening concepts, privacy, confidentiality, unusual transactions, diminished capacity concerns | Know when to ask more questions, restrict action, escalate, or protect confidential information | What facts would make a transaction unusual for this client? |
| Supervision, records, and compliance culture | Branch supervision, approvals, exception reports, books and records, training, audits, enforcement consequences | Connect representative conduct to supervisory and recordkeeping duties | If it is not documented, how will the firm evidence compliance? |
What “ready” means for CPH scenarios
CPH-style readiness means you can move from facts to action. In final review, practice turning every scenario into this sequence:
- Who is the client and who has authority?
- What account, product, order, or communication is involved?
- What facts are missing, outdated, inconsistent, or suspicious?
- Is there a recommendation, conflict, complaint, discretion, or red flag?
- What is the compliant next step: proceed, pause, update, disclose, document, approve, refuse, or escalate?
| If the question asks… | Do not stop at… | Look for the exam decision point |
|---|---|---|
| “Can the representative accept the order?” | The client’s verbal instruction | Account approval, trading authority, suitability concerns, order type, documentation |
| “Is the recommendation suitable?” | Product return potential | Client facts, product risks, concentration, time horizon, liquidity, leverage, costs |
| “What should the representative do next?” | The fastest business outcome | Compliance sequence: pause, gather facts, disclose, obtain approval, document, escalate |
| “Is the communication acceptable?” | Whether the statement is technically true | Balance, risk disclosure, approval, records, misleading emphasis, performance context |
| “Is the conflict handled?” | Whether the client was told | Whether the conflict must be avoided, controlled, approved, disclosed, or escalated |
| “Is the complaint resolved?” | Whether the client seems satisfied | Firm complaint process, records, supervisory involvement, no private side arrangement |
Core client and account lifecycle checklist
Before opening or updating an account
- I can identify required client facts from a scenario.
- I can tell when client identity or authority is unclear.
- I can recognize when beneficial ownership, control, or decision-making authority matters.
- I can distinguish a client’s investment objective from risk tolerance, time horizon, liquidity need, and investment knowledge.
- I can identify when KYC information is incomplete, inconsistent, or stale.
- I can decide when the account should not be opened until questions are resolved.
- I can match account type to client purpose, authority, and risk profile.
- I can recognize when firm approval is needed before certain account types or features are used.
During the recommendation or order process
- I can determine whether an order is solicited, unsolicited, discretionary, or unauthorized.
- I can explain why unsolicited does not automatically mean “no compliance concern.”
- I can identify when a representative is exercising discretion without authority.
- I can compare product risk to the client’s ability and willingness to bear risk.
- I can spot concentration risk even if each individual security is familiar.
- I can decide when to recommend against, refuse, document, or escalate a client instruction.
- I can explain why leverage changes the suitability analysis.
- I can recognize when trade timing, allocation, or priority creates a fairness issue.
After the account is active
- I can identify events that should trigger a KYC update.
- I can recognize unusual transactions or account activity.
- I can distinguish a service issue from a complaint that must be escalated.
- I can identify inaccurate, late, missing, or misleading client communications.
- I can explain why documentation matters for approvals, recommendations, disclosures, and complaints.
- I can connect representative actions to supervisory review and firm records.
KYC readiness checklist
KYC questions often test whether the representative has enough reliable information to act. Be ready to distinguish “nice to know” facts from facts that drive suitability, account approval, risk, or red-flag analysis.
| Client fact area | What to know cold | Scenario cue |
|---|---|---|
| Identity and legal status | Who the client is, who controls the account, and who may give instructions | New client refuses to provide basic identity information |
| Employment and income | Stability and level of income, source of funds, ability to absorb losses | Client with modest income wants speculative leveraged trades |
| Net worth and liquidity | Financial cushion, emergency needs, liquid vs. illiquid assets | Client has high home equity but little cash flow |
| Investment objectives | Growth, income, preservation, speculation, tax considerations where relevant | Client says “safe income” but asks for highly volatile securities |
| Risk tolerance | Emotional willingness to accept volatility or loss | Client panics after small market decline but requests aggressive products |
| Risk capacity | Financial ability to withstand loss | Retired client has low capacity even if willing to take risk |
| Time horizon | When funds are needed | Client needs funds in six months but wants long-term illiquid exposure |
| Investment knowledge | Ability to understand products, risks, and account features | Client cannot explain margin but wants to borrow to invest |
| Tax and other constraints | Constraints that affect product or account choice | Client has specific tax, estate, or registered-account needs |
| Changes in circumstances | Events requiring updated facts | Job loss, inheritance, divorce, retirement, health change, new dependent |
KYC “can you do this?” prompts
- Given a short client profile, I can identify the most important missing KYC fact.
- I can explain why risk tolerance and risk capacity are different.
- I can identify contradictions in a client profile.
- I can decide when the representative should not rely on old information.
- I can recognize when a client’s instruction conflicts with stated objectives.
- I can determine whether more documentation, clarification, or supervisory review is needed.
KYP and product readiness checklist
For the CPH exam, product knowledge is tested through conduct: Did the representative understand the product well enough to recommend it, explain it, and assess suitability?
| Product factor | Review focus | Ask yourself |
|---|---|---|
| Structure | How the product works and what creates return or loss | Can I explain the product without relying on sales language? |
| Risk | Market, credit, liquidity, currency, interest-rate, issuer, sector, complexity, leverage, early-redemption, or concentration risk | Which risk is most relevant to this client? |
| Cost | Fees, commissions, spreads, embedded costs, borrowing costs, penalties, or ongoing charges | Would cost materially affect the recommendation? |
| Liquidity | Ability to sell, restrictions, market depth, valuation uncertainty | Can the client access funds when needed? |
| Complexity | Features that a retail client may misunderstand | Does the client have the knowledge to understand the risk? |
| Conflicts and compensation | Representative, firm, issuer, referral, or related-party interests | Could compensation influence the recommendation? |
| Target investor | Client type for whom the product is intended | Is this client inside or outside the likely target profile? |
| Alternatives | Comparable products or strategies | Is there a simpler, lower-cost, or lower-risk alternative? |
Product traps to review
- High-quality issuer does not automatically mean suitable product.
- Familiar product name does not remove the need for KYP.
- A product can be suitable for one account and unsuitable for another.
- A client’s stated desire for return does not override risk capacity.
- Liquidity risk matters even when expected return is attractive.
- Leverage can turn a moderate product risk into a high client risk.
- A complex product requires clear explanation and evidence that the client understands the key risks.
Suitability and recommendation checklist
Suitability is one of the central judgment areas. Practice with fact patterns that contain conflicting information.
| Suitability step | What to verify | Red flag |
|---|---|---|
| Client facts are current | KYC is complete and up to date | Major life event not reflected in account profile |
| Product facts are understood | KYP has been completed | Representative relies only on brochure or yield |
| Account type fits | Cash, margin, registered, managed, discretionary, or other account feature is appropriate | Conservative client placed in high-risk account feature without clear rationale |
| Recommendation fits objective | Product aligns with income, growth, preservation, or other objective | “Income” client recommended highly volatile speculative exposure |
| Risk fits tolerance and capacity | Client can emotionally and financially withstand loss | Low-capacity client agrees after pressure or incomplete explanation |
| Time horizon fits | Product liquidity and volatility match when money is needed | Short-term funds invested in illiquid or volatile product |
| Concentration is reasonable | Holdings are diversified enough for client profile | Too much in one issuer, sector, asset class, currency, or strategy |
| Costs are reasonable | Client understands cost and impact | Higher-cost option recommended without client benefit |
| Conflicts are addressed | Conflict is avoided, controlled, approved, and/or disclosed as required | Representative compensation drives product selection |
| Documentation supports decision | Rationale, disclosure, client instructions, and approvals are recorded | “Client understood” but no evidence exists |
Suitability “can you do this?” prompts
- I can identify the single fact that makes an otherwise reasonable recommendation unsuitable.
- I can distinguish a client’s preference from a suitable recommendation.
- I can recognize when an order should be marked or treated as unsolicited.
- I can determine whether an unsuitable unsolicited order should be accepted, refused, documented, or escalated under the scenario.
- I can evaluate suitability at the account level, not only trade by trade.
- I can spot when frequent trading may indicate churning or unsuitable activity.
- I can explain why a representative cannot solve suitability by saying, “The client approved it.”
- I can recognize that suitability must consider costs, conflicts, concentration, and leverage, not only expected return.
Decision path for recommendations and client orders
Use this as a reasoning path for exam scenarios, not as an official firm workflow.
flowchart TD
A[Client request or representative recommendation] --> B{Account approved and authority clear?}
B -- No --> B1[Pause: obtain approval, documentation, or authority]
B -- Yes --> C{KYC current and sufficient?}
C -- No --> C1[Update KYC before proceeding]
C -- Yes --> D{Product understood under KYP?}
D -- No --> D1[Do not recommend until product risks and features are understood]
D -- Yes --> E{Material conflict present?}
E -- Yes --> E1[Disclose, manage, obtain approval, avoid, or escalate as required]
E -- No --> F{Suitable for client and account?}
E1 --> F
F -- No --> F1[Warn, decline recommendation, document, refuse or escalate where required]
F -- Yes --> G{Communication and documentation complete?}
G -- No --> G1[Complete disclosure, approval, and records]
G -- Yes --> H[Proceed according to firm procedures]
Account type, authority, and documentation checks
| Account or authority issue | What to review | Exam cue |
|---|---|---|
| Individual account | Client identity, KYC, objectives, authority | Client asks someone else to call in trades |
| Joint account | Instructions, ownership, survivorship or estate implications where applicable, authority of each party | One joint owner objects to trades by the other |
| Corporate account | Legal entity, authorized individuals, beneficial ownership/control, resolutions or approvals | Employee of company wants to trade without proper authority |
| Trust or estate account | Trustee, executor, fiduciary authority, investment constraints | Beneficiary wants to instruct trades directly |
| Registered account | Account purpose, contribution or withdrawal implications, eligible strategy considerations | Client wants speculative or leveraged strategy without understanding account limits |
| Margin or borrowing feature | Risk disclosure, credit approval, interest cost, collateral, margin calls, suitability | Client cannot meet potential calls or repay loan |
| Options or complex product approval | Client knowledge, risk disclosure, product approval, strategy level | New investor wants advanced strategy after reading online post |
| Discretionary or managed account | Proper account approval, authority, mandate, supervision, documentation | Representative chooses security, quantity, price, or timing without client decision |
| Trading authorization / power of attorney | Written authority, scope, limits, conflicts, revocation | Family member claims verbal authority |
| Fee-based account | Cost-benefit analysis, trading pattern, services provided, conflicts | Low-activity account pays high ongoing fee without clear benefit |
Trading practices checklist
Order handling and execution
- I can identify whether an order is client-directed, representative-recommended, discretionary, or unauthorized.
- I can distinguish time-and-price discretion from broader investment discretion.
- I can spot when changing quantity, security, account, or strategy becomes discretionary.
- I can recognize order priority and fair treatment issues.
- I can identify improper trade allocation between clients.
- I can recognize when a trade error must be reported and corrected through firm procedures.
- I can distinguish a market order, limit order, stop order, and other common order instructions at a conduct level.
- I can identify when best execution or fair pricing concepts may be relevant.
- I can recognize short-selling, restricted-security, insider-information, or market-manipulation concerns when cued.
Market integrity and prohibited conduct
| Conduct issue | What it looks like in a scenario | Best-answer pattern |
|---|---|---|
| Insider information | Client or representative has material non-public information | Do not trade or tip; escalate through proper channels |
| Rumours | Trading or recommending based on unverified market rumours | Avoid misleading clients; verify before communicating or acting |
| Front-running | Representative or firm benefits before client order | Client priority and conflict concern; prohibited/unacceptable conduct |
| Churning | Excessive trading to generate compensation | Suitability, cost, and conflict issue |
| Wash trades or artificial activity | Trades create misleading market appearance | Market manipulation concern |
| Improper allocation | Favouring one account over another after execution | Fair allocation and supervision issue |
| Unauthorized trading | Trade entered without client instruction or proper authority | Report, correct, document, and escalate |
| Private settlement | Representative personally compensates client to hide issue | Prohibited or unacceptable; use firm process |
Communications, advertising, and disclosure checklist
Client communication questions often turn on whether the communication is fair, balanced, approved, and documented.
| Communication type | Review focus | Red flags |
|---|---|---|
| Recommendation | Balanced risk and benefit explanation; suitability rationale | Only upside shown; risk minimized |
| Advertising or marketing | Approval, fairness, no misleading claims, clear assumptions | “Guaranteed,” “risk-free,” selective performance |
| Performance reporting | Accurate period, method, fees, benchmarks, limitations | Cherry-picked returns or unclear calculation basis |
| Research or market commentary | Source, assumptions, conflicts, reasonable basis | Rumour presented as fact |
| Email, text, or social media | Firm-approved channels, retention, supervision | Off-channel advice or unapproved posts |
| Fee and cost disclosure | Clear explanation of charges and conflicts | Client surprised by commissions, spreads, trailer-type compensation, or borrowing costs |
| Relationship disclosure | Services, account operation, responsibilities, costs, conflicts, complaint process | Client does not understand role of representative or firm |
| Risk disclosure | Product and strategy risks, not generic boilerplate only | Client signs form but scenario shows no understanding |
Communication “can you do this?” prompts
- I can identify misleading performance language.
- I can explain why balanced disclosure must include material risks and limitations.
- I can distinguish approved client communication from informal promotion.
- I can spot exaggerated, promissory, or guarantee-like wording.
- I can identify when a communication creates a recommendation.
- I can determine whether a conflict must be disclosed in the communication.
- I can recognize when records must be retained for business communications.
Conflicts of interest readiness checklist
Conflicts are heavily scenario-driven. The best answer is often not merely “tell the client.” Some conflicts must be avoided, controlled, approved, or escalated.
| Conflict source | Scenario cue | What to be ready to decide |
|---|---|---|
| Compensation | Product pays higher compensation than alternatives | Is the recommendation still in the client’s interest and properly disclosed? |
| Referral arrangement | Representative receives or pays referral fee | Is the arrangement approved, disclosed, documented, and permitted? |
| Outside activity | Representative has side business, board role, or paid activity | Is approval required and could clients be misled? |
| Personal financial dealings | Borrowing from, lending to, or investing with a client | Is the relationship inappropriate or prohibited under policy/rules? |
| Gifts and entertainment | Client, issuer, or third party offers benefit | Could it influence judgment or appear to do so? |
| Related issuer or connected party | Firm or representative has relationship with issuer | Is disclosure sufficient, or must recommendation be restricted? |
| Personal trading | Representative trades same security as clients | Client priority, front-running, and information misuse concerns |
| Family or vulnerable client relationship | Representative gains special benefit or authority | Conflict, undue influence, and supervision concerns |
Conflict traps
- Disclosure alone is not always enough.
- Client consent does not automatically cure an inappropriate conflict.
- A conflict can exist even if the representative believes they are acting fairly.
- A small benefit can still be material depending on context.
- Referral arrangements require more than a casual handshake.
- Outside activities can create client confusion even when unrelated to securities.
- A conflict must be considered before the recommendation, not after the trade.
Complaints, errors, and escalation checklist
| Issue | Recognize it when… | Correct exam instinct |
|---|---|---|
| Complaint | Client alleges loss, misconduct, unsuitable advice, unauthorized trading, misleading communication, or poor handling | Escalate through firm complaint process; document |
| Service inquiry | Client asks about delay, form, statement, or account access without allegation | Resolve appropriately, but monitor if it becomes a complaint |
| Trade error | Wrong account, security, quantity, price, timing, or instruction | Report internally and correct under firm procedures |
| Unauthorized trade | Client did not authorize or authority was invalid | Escalate, document, do not hide or backdate |
| Unsuitable trade allegation | Client says recommendation did not match profile | Review KYC, recommendation rationale, disclosure, supervision |
| Private settlement | Representative offers personal payment or side deal | Not acceptable; use firm-approved process |
| Record issue | Missing notes, forms, approvals, or communication records | Documentation failure can worsen conduct issue |
Complaint “can you do this?” prompts
- I can recognize a complaint even if the client does not use the word “complaint.”
- I can distinguish resolving a misunderstanding from suppressing a complaint.
- I can identify when a supervisor or compliance department must be involved.
- I can explain why the representative should not promise a result or settle privately.
- I can identify what documents would be reviewed in a complaint investigation.
- I can recognize when a complaint reveals a broader supervisory or suitability issue.
AML, privacy, and client protection checks
The CPH exam may test whether you recognize suspicious or sensitive facts and choose the correct escalation path.
| Area | Be ready to identify | Typical action pattern |
|---|---|---|
| Client identification | Missing, inconsistent, or unverifiable identity information | Pause or obtain required information under firm procedures |
| Source of funds | Funds inconsistent with client profile or vague explanations | Ask questions, document, escalate if suspicious |
| Unusual transactions | Activity inconsistent with known client behaviour | Investigate and escalate as required |
| Third-party involvement | Someone else supplies funds, gives instructions, or controls decisions | Verify authority and beneficial/control information |
| Sanctions or restricted persons | Potential match or high-risk relationship | Escalate; do not proceed casually |
| Privacy | Sharing client information without proper basis | Protect confidentiality; use approved channels |
| Vulnerable client concerns | Diminished capacity, undue influence, sudden unusual withdrawal, exploitation indicators | Follow firm escalation and client-protection procedures |
| Cyber or impersonation concern | Unusual email, urgent wire request, changed banking details | Verify through approved process before acting |
Scenario cues and best-answer patterns
| If the scenario says… | Think first about… | Strong answer pattern |
|---|---|---|
| “The client is in a hurry and wants to trade before paperwork is complete.” | Account approval and documentation | Do not bypass required account-opening steps |
| “The spouse usually handles financial matters.” | Trading authority | Confirm authority on file before accepting instructions |
| “The client insists they accept all risk.” | Suitability and client protection | Explain risk; assess suitability; document; escalate/refuse if needed |
| “The representative knows the client personally.” | Objectivity, documentation, conflicts | Apply the same KYC, suitability, and record standards |
| “A product has high yield.” | Risk, liquidity, issuer, complexity, compensation | Do not equate yield with suitability |
| “The client complains verbally at a meeting.” | Complaint recognition | Treat as a complaint if allegations or dissatisfaction meet firm criteria |
| “The representative made an honest mistake.” | Error reporting | Report and correct; do not conceal |
| “The client wants to keep activity private.” | AML, privacy, suspicious activity | Protect confidentiality but escalate suspicious facts |
| “The client asks for a guarantee.” | Misrepresentation | Do not guarantee investment performance unless the product terms truly support the statement and disclosure is accurate |
| “The representative posts market commentary online.” | Approved communication and records | Use approved channels and balanced language |
| “The client is elderly and suddenly liquidates holdings.” | Capacity, undue influence, suitability, fraud risk | Ask appropriate questions and escalate under firm procedures |
| “The representative is offered a referral fee.” | Conflict and approval | Obtain required approval, disclose, document, or decline |
Common weak areas and traps
| Trap | Why candidates miss it | Better exam approach |
|---|---|---|
| Treating client consent as full protection | Many scenarios say the client agreed | Ask whether the action was suitable, authorized, disclosed, documented, and permitted |
| Ignoring account-level suitability | Candidates assess only the single trade | Consider concentration, costs, leverage, liquidity, and overall portfolio |
| Confusing risk tolerance and risk capacity | Both relate to risk but are different | Tolerance is willingness; capacity is financial ability to bear loss |
| Assuming unsolicited orders remove all duties | “Client asked for it” sounds decisive | Duties may still include warning, documentation, supervision, or refusal/escalation |
| Missing authority problems | Family members often appear in scenarios | Verify who legally may instruct the account |
| Overlooking conflicts | Compensation or referral details seem incidental | Ask whether the conflict could influence advice or client perception |
| Thinking disclosure always cures conflict | Disclosure is visible and easy | Some conflicts must be avoided or controlled, not merely disclosed |
| Treating signed forms as enough | Exams often mention signatures | Ask whether the client understood and whether the recommendation was still appropriate |
| Underestimating verbal complaints | No formal letter is provided | Allegations can trigger complaint handling even when verbal |
| Accepting off-channel communication | Texts and social posts feel routine | Business communications need approval, supervision, and retention |
| Delaying escalation | Representative wants to fix issue alone | Compliance issues usually require prompt internal reporting |
| Memorizing terms without application | Definitions feel easier than scenarios | Practice choosing the next compliant step from facts |
High-value vocabulary checklist
Be able to define and apply these terms in scenario context:
- Account appropriateness
- Best execution
- Beneficial ownership / control
- Churning
- Client priority
- Complaint
- Concentration risk
- Conflict of interest
- Discretionary trading
- Fair allocation
- Front-running
- Insider information
- Know Your Client
- Know Your Product
- Leverage
- Margin
- Material conflict
- Misrepresentation
- Outside activity
- Personal financial dealings
- Privacy and confidentiality
- Referral arrangement
- Relationship disclosure
- Risk capacity
- Risk tolerance
- Solicited order
- Suitability
- Trade error
- Trading authorization
- Unauthorized trading
- Unsolicited order
- Vulnerable client concern
Final-week review checklist
Seven to five days out
- Rebuild the topic-area table from memory.
- Write a one-page summary of KYC, KYP, suitability, conflicts, complaints, and supervision.
- Review every missed practice question and label the miss: definition, scenario fact, process order, or judgment.
- Drill authority scenarios: spouse, joint owner, attorney, trustee, executor, corporate officer, assistant.
- Drill conflict scenarios: compensation, referral, outside activity, gifts, related issuer, personal trading.
Four to three days out
- Complete mixed scenario sets rather than isolated chapter review.
- For every question, state the compliant next step before looking at answer choices.
- Practice eliminating answers that are too fast, undocumented, undisclosed, unsupervised, or client-pressure driven.
- Review complaint and trade-error handling.
- Review communication and advertising traps.
Two days out
- Revisit only high-yield weak areas and error-log notes.
- Practice short timed blocks to improve reading discipline.
- Review vocabulary that changes the answer: solicited, unsolicited, discretionary, unauthorized, material, approved, disclosed, documented, escalated.
- Recheck leverage, margin, concentration, and liquidity scenario logic.
- Stop adding new study sources unless they address a clear weak area.
Day before
- Review your one-page conduct process map.
- Memorize the decision sequence: authority, KYC, KYP, conflict, suitability, disclosure, documentation, supervision.
- Re-read common traps.
- Do a light mixed review, not a full cram session.
- Prepare your exam-day logistics separately from content review.
Exam-question triage checklist
When a CPH question feels close between two answers, ask:
- Who is responsible? Representative, supervisor, firm, client, third party, or issuer?
- What is the action? Recommendation, order, account opening, communication, complaint response, outside activity, or escalation?
- Is authority clear? If not, pause.
- Are KYC facts sufficient and current? If not, update before acting.
- Is the product understood? If not, do not recommend.
- Is there a conflict? If yes, determine whether to avoid, disclose, manage, approve, or escalate.
- Is the action suitable and fair? Consider the client and the account as a whole.
- Is the communication balanced and accurate? Avoid misleading shortcuts.
- Is documentation required? If yes, choose the answer that creates a record.
- Should compliance or supervision be involved? If the scenario includes complaint, error, red flag, conflict, or rule breach, escalation is often key.
Practical next step
After you can check most items on this page, move into mixed CPH practice questions. Focus on rationales, not just scores. For every missed question, write the rule or decision point in one sentence and add it to a short final-review error log.