Revisiting the differences between CIMA and ACCA (2017 version)

During this time, both competitors for the hearts of financiers - both CIMA and ACCA - have changed, updated and improved. Yes, I am too. In a sense, if it has not been updated and improved, then at least after a couple of written textbooks on CIMA P1 and P2, I can compare in detail not only my favorite line of subjects in IFRS , but also how in ACCA and CIMA management accounting and financial management have been submitted .

In general, since everything is different and everything is different, I decided to update that old comparison of mine. Below is a new summary picture: accp certification

To be honest, it has become easier to compare. After CIMA shoveled its program in 2015, redistributing topics between the subjects of the curriculum in a new way, I succeeded in what I could not do 7 years ago: to make a comparison by subject. Although now there are still cases when what is collected in ACCA in one subject is scattered over several CIMA subjects, and vice versa. I also showed it in the table.

But the most interesting thing is that the key findings from today's qualifications comparison are the same as those of 7 years ago:

There is much more in common in the qualifications of ACCA and CIMA than differences : both in the content of the subjects and in the depth of examination. Therefore, if you are determined to gain a career advantage in finance with a financial qualification, the key is to get some kind of qualification.

CIMA, to a greater extent than ACCA, works on general management disciplines (people management, marketing, stakeholder management, etc.), which accounts for almost a third of the program (line E1-E2-E3). In fact, in the context of our educational reality, this line duplicates part of the standard university program in business management. Therefore, only with a slight stretch it can be said that  CIMA "educates" a manager who owns the tools of a financier .

ACCA, to a greater extent than CIMA, focuses on finance itself, taking a deeper and deeper look at a specific set of financial instruments: from advanced financial management to understanding the external audit process. That is, ACCA “grows” a financier who understands how business works .

In principle, all this is reflected not only in the self-positioning of each qualification, but also in their names. It is known that the name of both qualifications uses the word "accountant", which - and this is important - in the Russian equivalent is much closer to the word "financier" than to the word "accountant". Only ACCA is just an Association of Chartered Certified Accountants , that is, just a "financier" , and CIMA is a Chartered Institute of Management Accountants , that is, "a financier from management," literally translated. The conclusions from my comparison only confirm this difference in names.

Okay, you ask - what will the resume be? Where to go?

My answer is evasive: it all depends on your specific situation. In general, both qualifications make a financier better and smarter in a number of ways. Both qualifications claim global coverage. That is, in terms of career advantages, both CIMA and ACCA will give you a lot. But one of them is more financial specific (ACCA), and in the other - more managerial specific (CIMA). Now decide what you personally need more, taking into account what kind of education you have, what are your career preferences and professional preferences.

That seems to be all. But before leaving, I will clarify for those who are not aware that, in addition to subject differences, ACCA differs from CIMA in the method of testing knowledge and skills. For example, exams in each individual CIMA subject are shorter - only one and a half hours versus the standard three-hour exams in ACCA. But between the CIMA levels there are large case exams covering as many as three subjects at once (E1-P1-F1, for example). But we will talk about this difference in testing some other time.