CA Final Jan 2026 Exam Analysis: Paper Pattern, RTP Trends & High-Yield Topics for May 2026

The CA Final January 2026 examinations were acknowledged as one of the most difficult, particularly for AFM, IDT, and IBS papers. Students faced unexpected twists in question patterns, tricky adjustments, and high-level application-based problems that tested both conceptual understanding and exam strategy. 

This detailed CA Final Jan 2026 Exam Analysis breaks down each paper’s difficulty, highlights key scoring areas, and offers actionable strategies for May 2026 preparation.

From prioritizing high-weightage topics in Auditing to mastering conceptual and practical questions in AFM, IDT, and IBS, this guide equips aspirants with a clear roadmap to maximize efficiency, avoid common pitfalls like the “three-attempt cycle,” and improve their chances of success in the next CA Final attempt in May 2026.

CA Group 1 Paper Analysis

CA Final Jan 2026 exam analysis for Group 1 is explained here to help students going to appear for the next cycle examination:

CA Financial Reporting (FR) Paper

The Financial Reporting paper was generally considered manageable, aligning with its historical trend as the first paper of the exams. However, a significant challenge for students was its lengthy nature, making timely completion difficult. The Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) in FR were of an average difficulty level.

Enroll Now for CA Courses

CA Auditing Paper

The Auditing paper provided a degree of relief compared to previous attempts, perceived as a manageable and "passable" paper, though not easy. The question distribution aligned well with expected high-weightage topics. Professional Ethics was tested for approximately 30 marks (including MCQs), significantly more than its expected 20-22 marks, making it a highly scoring area.

Expected questions from Standards on Auditing (SA), such as SA 240, were included. A new question type emerged, relating to the investment aspect of a bank audit. Additionally, a couple of MCQs were highly judgmental, which may lead to grace marks of 2-4 marks from the ICAI.

Audit Strategy for May 2026

To achieve high scores in Audit, a prioritized study approach is recommended, focusing on high-yield areas first.

Priority 1: Core High-Weightage Topics

These topics require absolute detail, without any selective study.

1. Professional Ethics (Chapter 19): This chapter alone can contribute 20-30 marks. No part of it should be compromised.

2. Standards on Auditing (SA, SAE, SRS, SRE): Although the syllabus weightage is 50 marks, it was tested for approximately 55 marks in Jan 2026.

3. CARO: Typically carries 4-5 marks and should be covered in detail.

Collectively, Professional Ethics and Standards on Auditing accounted for nearly 80 marks of the paper.

Priority 2: Remaining Chapters

For other chapters such as Bank Audit, ESG, and Digital Audit, a selective study approach can be adopted if time is limited. The recommended method is to cover the important topics from these chapters and supplement this with a comprehensive question bank. Success in Audit requires both strong conceptual understanding and the ability to recall and articulate specific keywords effectively.

Advanced Financial Management (AFM) Paper Analysis

The AFM paper was rated as above average or difficult. While the MCQs were of average difficulty, the descriptive section posed significant challenges due to two main reasons:

1. New Questions: The paper introduced completely new questions that had not been encountered before.

2. Tricky Adjustments: Even in seemingly familiar questions, the ICAI incorporated new, tricky adjustments or altered the final requirement, fundamentally changing the problem's nature.

This difficulty marked a significant departure from the trend of the preceding four attempts, where the AFM paper had consistently been easy. An example of a new question was one on Sharpe Optimum Portfolio. Although this concept has been part of the syllabus for over 20 years, it had never been tested by the ICAI, making it conventionally an "unimportant" topic in student preparation.

CA AFM Strategy for May 2026

To effectively navigate a difficult AFM paper, a three-pronged strategy is essential:

1. Deep Conceptual Focus: While new questions may appear, their underlying concepts remain the same and are available in the study material. A strong conceptual foundation is therefore non-negotiable.

2. Comprehensive Question Coverage: Avoid selective study of only "important" questions. Students must cover all ICAI materials, including Study Material, RTPs, MTPs, and Past Year Papers, to gain exposure to a wide variety of problem types.

3. Practice New Adjustments: Consistent practice with new adjustments is crucial. Students should utilize resources such as compiled videos of new questions from recent RTPs, MTPs, and papers to ensure preparedness.

CA Indirect Tax Laws (IDT) Paper Analysis

The IDT paper was described as very tricky and difficult. Its MCQs contained subtle details that were easily missed under exam pressure (e.g., an ECO-related MCQ). The subjective part heavily focused on areas like Exemptions, RCM (Reverse Charge Mechanism), and the Charging Section.

The paper notably featured tough, tricky, and completely unseen questions that were not sourced from the module, RTPs, or MTPs (e.g., the RWA question). This experience underscores the importance of adapting one's approach after encountering significant challenges in an exam. (Doing a mistake is allowed, but repeating the same mistake is not. If you repeat it, it is no longer a mistake; it becomes a choice.)

CA IDT Strategy and Advice for May 2026

Immediate action is crucial for students who are confident they will not clear the exam (e.g., scoring below 40). They should not wait for the official results. After a short break of a week or 10 days, they must resume their studies immediately.

Students often fall into the three-attempt cycle trap. The system of three exams per year can be counter-productive if students wait for results and then fail, leaving only 1.5 months to prepare, which is insufficient. This can lead to a repeated cycle of attempts. (The cycle of waiting for results and failing to prepare in time for the next exam was described as a 'bhool bhulaiyaa' (a labyrinth or maze) that students must avoid getting trapped in.) 

The recommendation is to proactively assess your performance. If it is poor, accept it and start preparing for the next attempt with a clear plan. This proactive approach will position you strongly, where the final 1.5 months are dedicated only to revision and mock tests.

CA Integrated Business Solutions (IBS) Paper Analysis

The IBS paper was tough. The MCQs were of a high level and very time-consuming, potentially taking up to 2 hours to solve. The descriptive part is inherently lengthy, involving a multi-step process: understanding the case, identifying the relevant concept, and then formulating the answer.

The primary challenge of the IBS paper is its lengthy and time-consuming nature, making it nearly impossible for any student to complete. This difficulty is further compounded when concepts are tricky or require deep, detailed application.

CA IBS Paper Strategy for May 2026

The most critical strategic shift for the IBS paper is the treatment of two specific subjects: SCMPE and Law are no longer optional subjects. They must now be considered a mandatory part of the CA Final syllabus for IBS preparation. Evidence from the Jan 2026 exam shows 41 marks were allocated to questions from SCMPE and Law, consistent with the 35-40 mark weightage observed in the previous two attempts.

The preparation plan should include:

• SCMPE: Practice all practical questions.

• Law: Review all important provisions to ensure preparedness for any questions from this area.