SCI CMFAS RES5 Cheat Sheet
Cheat sheet: use a compact RES5 reference for Singapore financial-advisory actors, source hierarchy, product and client scope, controls, ethics, and advisory workflow.
Use the tables for a quick pre-exam check. Expand a topic’s notes for explanations, examples, and additional distinctions.
Actor map
| Actor | Exam-useful role |
|---|---|
| Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) | Administers the financial-sector regulatory framework and issues relevant notices, guidelines, codes, and supervisory requirements |
| Singapore College of Insurance (SCI) | Administers RES5, publishes exam information, and identifies the applicable study-text version |
| Financial adviser | Firm-level licensing or exemption, governance, controls, supervision, disclosure, recommendation, record, and client-outcome responsibilities |
| Representative | Performs regulated activities for the principal within appointment, competency, conduct, disclosure, and supervision requirements |
| Introducer | Makes a permitted introduction without crossing into regulated advice or misrepresenting status |
| Client | Supplies relevant information, states objectives and constraints, considers recommendations, and makes an informed decision |
| Board and senior management | Set culture, accountability, oversight, control, remuneration, and fair-dealing expectations |
| Insurer, fund manager, and trustee | Hold the product-governance, operational, valuation, custody, oversight, and disclosure responsibilities assigned by the controlling framework |
Source hierarchy
| Source | First question to ask |
|---|---|
| Financial Advisers Act (FAA) | Is the person or activity within the Act, and what statutory duty, power, exemption, or offence applies? |
| Financial Advisers Regulations (FAR) | What detailed licence, exemption, representation, conduct, or operating condition applies? |
| Securities and Futures Act (SFA) | Does the issue involve securities dealing, an offer, market conduct, insider trading, or hawking? |
| MAS notice | What mandatory requirement, trigger, deadline, control, report, or record applies? |
| MAS guideline | What supervisory standard or interpretation should guide conduct and controls? |
| Product code or notice | What product-specific governance, valuation, distribution, disclosure, or oversight rule applies? |
| Ethical principle and advisory process | What client-centred decision remains after minimum legal compliance is identified? |
Check the exact instrument and effective date. Similar labels do not make notices, guidelines, codes, and internal policies interchangeable.
Recommendation decision path
flowchart LR
A[Identify actor, client, and product] --> B[Collect relevant client facts]
B --> C[Analyse needs, risks, and constraints]
C --> D[Develop and compare suitable options]
D --> E[Disclose basis, risks, costs, and conflicts]
E --> F[Confirm informed client decision]
F --> G[Document, implement, and review]
If information is incomplete, identify what is missing and how that limitation affects the recommendation. Do not invent client facts to make an option suitable.
Control and evidence checklist
| Decision area | Evidence to look for |
|---|---|
| Appointment and competency | Status, examinations or exemptions, training, continuing development, register, due diligence, and supervision |
| Recommendation | Client information, product scope, analysis, reasonable basis, alternatives, warning, disclosure, and acknowledgement |
| AML/CFT/PF and sanctions | Risk assessment, due diligence, screening, monitoring, alert review, investigation, escalation, report, and tipping-off control |
| Technology and cyber risk | System classification, impact, threshold, detection, containment, recovery, notification, testing, and remediation |
| Fair dealing and distribution | Target segment, product fit, representative competence, information quality, complaint handling, monitoring, and management action |
| Ethics and conflicts | Conflict identification, client interest, transparency, control or avoidance, informed decision, supervision, and record |
| Financial planning | Objectives, cash flow, assets and liabilities, protection needs, assumptions, calculations, priorities, recommendation, implementation, and review |
Frequent boundary checks
- Firm responsibility versus representative responsibility
- Advice versus factual information or execution
- Recommended product versus a client-requested non-recommended product
- Mandatory notice requirement versus guideline expectation
- CKA versus CAR
- Documentation Review versus Call-back
- Product authorisation or recognition versus suitability for a specific client
- Actual, potential, and perceived conflicts
- Suitability duty versus fiduciary duty
- Misrepresentation, material omission, fraud, unsuitable selling, and market misconduct
- Immediate incident response versus regulatory reporting and later remediation
Two-part scoring reminder
Do not use only an overall percentage. Track the 110-question Part I and 40-question Part II results separately, because SCI requires at least 75% in Part I and at least 80% in Part II.
Precise thresholds, forms, dates, notice versions, CPF figures, and transitional rules can change. Verify them through the official resources .
Check the study-text version first
This review targets SCI RES5 1st Edition Version 1.3 for examinations from 22 September 2026. If your sitting is earlier, confirm the version assigned by SCI before using date-sensitive rules.
Treat RES5 as two score gates
| Part | Official question count | Pass requirement | Main emphasis |
|---|---|---|---|
| Part I | 110 | At least 75% | FAA and FAR, MAS notices and guidelines, product and market conduct, AML/CFT/PF, technology risk, collective investment schemes, and CPF |
| Part II | 40 | At least 80% | Professional ethics, conflicts and fair dealing, client relationships, fact finding, needs analysis, recommendations, presentation, and review |
Both requirements matter. A strong aggregate score does not compensate for a weak part.
Use five questions for every scenario
- Who is acting? Financial adviser, exempt financial adviser, representative, introducer, insurer, fund manager, trustee, client, supervisor, board, or regulator?
- What is being done? Advice, recommendation, arrangement, execution, marketing, disclosure, screening, reporting, supervision, or review?
- What controls the decision? The FAA, FAR, a MAS notice or guideline, the SFA, a code, CPF rules, an ethical principle, or the advisory process?
- What stage has been reached? Initial contact, fact finding, analysis, recommendation, client decision, transaction, monitoring, incident response, or remediation?
- What evidence is available? Client facts, declarations, disclosures, approvals, transaction records, investigation findings, escalation records, or review notes?
High-value Part I distinctions
- Separate a financial adviser firm’s obligation from a representative’s personal duty.
- Distinguish a licence or exemption condition from a conduct requirement that applies after entry.
- Identify the exact client, product, service, and transaction scope before applying a recommendation or disclosure rule.
- Keep mandatory notice requirements separate from non-mandatory guideline or standards language.
- Distinguish customer due diligence, ongoing monitoring, sanctions controls, suspicious transaction reporting, and tipping-off restrictions.
- Separate CKA, CAR, Documentation Review, Call-back, and the process for a requested non-recommended product.
- Treat delegation as an operating arrangement, not a transfer of regulatory accountability.
- Classify market conduct before choosing an investigation, disciplinary, civil, or criminal consequence.
Notes and examples
High-value Part II distinctions
- Ethics asks what ought to be done; minimum compliance alone may not resolve the client-facing decision.
- A conflict can be actual, potential, or perceived. Identify it before selecting disclosure, avoidance, consent, supervision, or another control.
- Fact finding precedes needs analysis; needs analysis precedes a supportable recommendation.
- Suitability depends on the client’s objectives, time horizon, risk profile, affordability, liquidity, knowledge, and other relevant circumstances.
- A presentation should explain material benefits, risks, disadvantages, assumptions, costs, and alternatives in language the client can understand.
- Review is triggered by agreed intervals and relevant changes, not only by poor investment performance.
Final review sequence
- Take one unseen mixed set and score Part I and Part II separately.
- Classify each miss by actor, source, process stage, and missing evidence.
- Drill the two weakest planning topics with new questions.
- Revisit the controlling rule or advisory principle, not only the answer letter.
- Complete the free 150-question practice exam under a three-hour limit.
- Verify version-sensitive details through the official resources .