ACCA Strategic Professional · APM + AFM
At Strategic Professional that is simply the state of practice. ACCA’s own Practice Platform hands you a model answer and asks you to grade yourself. Two tutor-marked mocks from a tuition provider cost €59.98 and come back three days later, on a PDF. Everything else is a question bank.
Gradd marks the answer you actually wrote — in about a minute, as many times as you want, and it names the step where your figure diverged.
“Contract count, sell direction and both rate scenarios are right. The closing futures price omits the 0.15 unexpired basis, so the hedge locks 4.95% where the answer is 4.80%.”
“States the basis-risk limitation outright rather than presenting the two-scenario reconciliation as proof the rate is guaranteed.”
The answer you wrote, marked — not a model answer you grade yourself.
The state of practice
A question bank tells you whether a number matched. It cannot tell you that your answer stopped short of the judgement the verb asked for, or which step sent the figure wrong.
| ACCA Practice Platform | Tuition-provider mocks | Question banks | Gradd | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Who marks your written answer | You do — against a model answer | A tutor, on a PDF | Nobody | Ezra, against the requirement |
| Turnaround | Instant, self-graded | Three days | — | About a minute |
| Names where your figure diverged | — | Tutor’s discretion | — | ✓ |
| Times each requirement against its budget | — | — | — | ✓ |
| Attempts | Unlimited | Two per paper | Unlimited | Unlimited |
| Cost for one sitting | Free | €59.98 for the two | Varies by provider | €99 per paper |
Scroll to see more →
The proof · AFM Mock Paper 1
A candidate sat AFM Mock Paper 1 blind, with no access to any answer-side field. On the interest-rate futures hedge the contract count was right, the sell direction was right, and both the rate-rise and rate-fall scenarios reconciled to the same 4.95% — which is precisely the self-check the requirement asks for. It confirmed the wrong answer.
contracts, sold — the count and the direction are both right. This is the near-correct script, not the zero script.
is the whole error. The unexpired basis was never taken off the closing futures price, so the hedge locks 4.95% where the answer is 4.80%.
components pass on tolerance. All five failures trace to that one missed step — not five separate errors.
96 contracts, sold. Loan interest, futures gain and net cost all priced consistently off the candidate’s own closing price. Both scenarios land on 4.95%, and the script reads as confirmed.
The omitted 0.15 applies identically to the rate-rise and the rate-fall leg. The reconciliation is invariant to the omission — it lands just as cleanly on the wrong rate as on the right one.
The unexpired basis was never subtracted. Closing price 94.85, not 95.00; effective rate 4.80%, not 4.95%. One conceptual step, named — rather than five red components handed back as five errors.
Self-grading against a model answer shows a 0.15 gap. It does not tell you the gap is the basis, or that one step closes all five.
Pacing · What a PDF cannot do
Gradd can, because every requirement is submitted separately and timestamped. The debrief measures each submission-to-submission interval against the paper’s own arithmetic — 195 minutes, 100 marks, 1.95 minutes per mark — and reports what happened.
“Between submitting Q2 (ii) and finishing, 12 minutes elapsed across Q3 (i)–Q3 (ii), against a combined budget of 39 minutes. The final 2 requirements recorded no answer that could earn marks.”
Reported without a ratio on purpose: this interval contains the Section A scenario and its exhibits, so a marks-derived budget would mean nothing.
Verbatim from a real end-to-end run, 31 July 2026.
Two papers live
Each paper is bought on its own. The drills, the cases and the mock belong to that paper — there is no shared bank and no bundle.
Advanced Performance Management
Ezra diagnoses why an answer lost marks — describing a model instead of applying it, stopping short of the judgement the verb demanded — then coaches the fix until the answer would score.
What’s live: 91 drills, free to attempt · 5 practice exam cases · professional-skills marking · a timed mock, marked as one paper.
APM in detailAdvanced Financial Management
The senior-adviser register: your arithmetic is usually fine, but the ADVICE would not survive a boardroom. Ezra pushes from a correct number to a committed recommendation.
What’s live: 63 drills, free to attempt · 5 practice exam cases · professional-skills marking · a timed mock, marked as one paper.
AFM in detailPricing
Every drill in the paper, unlimited, plus three full teach-throughs with Ezra. No card.
Unlimited coaching, exam cases, professional-skills marking and the timed mock, through your sitting.
The same access, month to month. Cancel any time.
Prices are per paper. Buying APM does not include AFM.
Your result slip gives you a score. It does not name the habit that cost the marks. Three quick steps — your score, how each syllabus area went, and six honest questions about how you write — and you get the areas to drill and the habits to fix first.
Every drill free · €99 per paper for 90 days, or €49/month · No card to start