Do not rely on the Content Type section to determine whether you did well in a section or not. That part of the performance report is complete bullsh–. I just looked at it on the AICPA website and I see they are still doing the same stupid crap as they did back when I took the exam a few years ago.
This is what it says: “First, each content area contains fewer questions than the total exam, so the results on a single content area are much less reliable than the total exam score. Second, candidates are administered a different set of items and a different number of items that cover different aspects of the content areas. Consequently, the content area performance should not be used to interpret areas of importance or emphasis when retaking a section.”
What that means is they only take a sample of questions from each content area to give your score. For example, let's use your report as an example: I. Conceptual Framework, Standard-Setting and Financial Reporting (25–35%): Weaker
Just from these two sections, it indicates you scored “weaker”. But here is how it works. Let's say you had 20 questions in each of those two sections. They might take seven questions from each of those sections, determine if you got those seven questions right or wrong, and then determine your strength in that area. So out of those 25 questions, let's say you got 20 of them right. By chance, they chose the five questions you got wrong and three you got right for your performance report. Yea, you got five out of eight wrong in that sameple so they might say you are “weaker” but in reality, you got 80% of them right.
That is about as unreliable as any report can be since they don't use all of the questions in the exam. I do appreciate their disclaimer at the end of that paragraph, though, and I agree. Study everything again, not just the parts which indicate “weaker” or “comparable” because for all you know, it can be opposite for all content areas on that report.
FAR - 75 | REG - 87 | AUD - 82 | LAW - 81
.