0455 · Cambridge IGCSE
0455/21
Structured Questions
Economics · June 2024 · Variant 1
Relative difficulty
Analysis source: Cambridge Assessment International Education
3.0 / 5
120
180 min
Market failure
Cohort performance
Session statistics from official examination reports
Total marks
120
Duration
180 min
Session difficulty
3.0 / 5
Key examiner messages
Top priorities from the principal examiner before you revise
The May/June 2024 Economics (0455) papers represent a balanced assessment, earning a difficulty rating of 3 out of 5.
While Paper 1 featured direct multiple-choice questions testing core definitions, Paper 2 demanded rigorous application of economic theory to real-world contexts, particularly in Section A (Nicaragua case study) and the level-of-response essays in Section B.
Question difficulty map
How candidates performed on each question in this series
No data available in official reports
Assessment objectives
Skill and AO weighting from official examiner commentary
Skill weighting
Shows the skill mix this paper tested most heavily.
Knowledge and Understanding
Weight: 3100%Analysis
Weight: 267%Evaluation
Weight: 133%
Method marks watchlist
Where working, steps, or method marks were commonly lost
No data available in official reports
Recurring mistakes across years
Themes examiners flag in multiple recent sessions for this subject
No data available in official reports
Question choice intelligence
Mean scores and popularity for optional questions (HKDSE electives)
No data available in official reports
Level exemplars
What candidate scripts at each grade level looked like
No data available in official reports
Grade & admission context
How marks relate to grade thresholds and entry standards
Report type
Cambridge Principal Examiner Report — component performance and international standards
Level A*
Approx. 75% of maximum mark
Level A
Approx. 65% of maximum mark
Level B
Approx. 55% of maximum mark
Level C
Approx. 45% of maximum mark
Level D
Approx. 38% of maximum mark
Level E
Approx. 31% of maximum mark
Deep insights
What top candidates did
Techniques and approaches examiners rewarded in this series
No data available in official reports
Command word playbook
How to match each command word to the expected response style
Present multiple perspectives with evidence; balance breadth and depth.
Break into parts and explain how each contributes to the whole question focus.
Give reasons and link mechanism to outcome; each point needs a because/so chain.
Name or point to the specific feature asked for — avoid extra explanation.
Match the expected response style for “Define” questions.
Show formula, substitution, and unit; method marks need visible working.
Time traps
Sections where candidates spent disproportionate time relative to marks
Min per mark: 1.5
Min per mark: 1.5
Syllabus traceability
Topics linked to questions and mark weighting in this session
Market failure
13 marks this session
Workers
9 marks this session
Fiscal policy
9 marks this session
Globalisation, free trade and protection
9 marks this session
Money and banking
8 marks this session
Living standards
8 marks this session
MCQ trap analytics
Commonly chosen wrong options from examiner commentary
No data available in official reports
Topic heatmap across years
Mark concentration by topic and exam year for this subject
Mark intensity
Fiscal policy
Workers
Market failure
Current account of balance of payments
Price determination
Inflation and deflation
Globalisation, free trade and protection
Firms
Difficulty trend
How session difficulty has shifted across recent years
Paper comparison
Marks and duration breakdown across papers in this session
Paper 1 Multiple Choice (11):
Paper 2 Structured Questions (21):
Marks you can still earn
Where valid approaches outside the mark scheme may still gain credit
No data available in official reports
Practise what examiners flagged
Target weak topics from this report inside the Revui app
Market failure
13 marks this session
Practise in RevuiWorkers
9 marks this session
Practise in RevuiFiscal policy
9 marks this session
Practise in RevuiGlobalisation, free trade and protection
9 marks this session
Practise in RevuiMoney and banking
8 marks this session
Practise in RevuiLiving standards
8 marks this session
Practise in RevuiSelf-diagnostic checklist
Key actions before you sit this paper — copy and tick off as you revise
- 1Message
The May/June 2024 Economics (0455) papers represent a balanced assessment, earning a difficulty rating of 3 out of 5.
- 2Message
While Paper 1 featured direct multiple-choice questions testing core definitions, Paper 2 demanded rigorous application of economic theory to real-world contexts, particularly in Section A (Nicaragua case study) and the level-of-response essays in Section B.
Teacher briefing pack
One-page session summary for tutors and classroom review
June 2024 2024
Economics
The May/June 2024 Economics (0455) papers represent a balanced assessment, earning a difficulty rating of 3 out of 5. While Paper 1 featured direct multiple-choice questions testing core definitions, Paper 2 demanded rigorous application of economic theory to real-world contexts,
The May/June 2024 Economics (0455) papers represent a balanced assessment, earning a difficulty rating of 3 out of 5.
While Paper 1 featured direct multiple-choice questions testing core definitions, Paper 2 demanded rigorous application of economic theory to real-world contexts, particularly in Section A (Nicaragua case study) and the level-of-response essays in Section B.
- Total marks
- 120
- Duration
- 180 min
- Session difficulty
- 3.0 / 5
Session analysis
The May/June 2024 Economics (0455) papers represent a balanced assessment, earning a difficulty rating of 3 out of 5. While Paper 1 featured direct multiple-choice questions testing core definitions, Paper 2 demanded rigorous application of economic theory to real-world contexts, particularly in Section A (Nicaragua case study) and the level-of-response essays in Section B.
Updated Jun 13, 2026
Paper breakdown
Paper 1 Multiple Choice (11):
Paper 2 Structured Questions (21):
Top chapters
Exam structure insights
Marks by chapter
See where the marks were concentrated so revision time goes to the highest-value topics.
Mark accessibility
Estimate which marks were basic, mid-level, or high-difficulty.
68% within easy or medium reach
Command word frequency
Spot common command words so answers match the expected response style.
Question type mix
Compare the mark share of each paper section and question type.
Discuss
(Part d)
44·6·31%
Analyse
(Part c)
33·6·24%
Multiple Choice Questions
30·30·21%
Explain
(Part b)
22·6·16%
Identify/Define/Calculate
(Part a)
11·6·8%
Study ROI
Bigger bubbles recur more often; higher bubbles carry more marks, helping you rank revision priorities.
Time vs marks
Compare marks with suggested time allocation to plan exam pacing.
Paper 1 Multiple Ch…
0.67 m/minPaper 2 Section A
0.67 m/minTotal marks
90
Total time
135 min
Avg pace
0.67
Next-year prediction
Topics worth watching next year, with the reason shown directly below each bar.
Inflation and deflation
88%88%
Monetary policy
85%85%
Price elasticity of supply (PES)
80%80%
Overall Difficulty Verdict
The May/June 2024 Economics (0455) papers represent a balanced assessment, earning a difficulty rating of 3 out of 5. While Paper 1 featured direct multiple-choice questions testing core definitions, Paper 2 demanded rigorous application of economic theory to real-world contexts, particularly in Section A (Nicaragua case study) and the level-of-response essays in Section B.
Examiner notes & key calculations
- Vague Discrimination Assertions: In wage-related questions (such as why women earn less than men), avoid generalizing about discrimination without exploring structural economic factors. Discuss differences in productivity, education, occupational concentration, and hours worked.
- Reversing Arguments: When discussing policy tools, do not simply reverse your analysis for the negative side. For instance, explaining how increased government spending reduces cyclical unemployment, and then saying "if spending falls, unemployment rises" will not gain additional marks. Offer distinct limitations instead, such as lag times or crowding out.
- Diagram Neglect: Always label axes precisely as Price (or P P P) and Quantity (or Q Q Q), rather than generic terms. Ensure equilibrium lines are fully drawn to the axes.
Exam tips
Paper format
- Duration
- 2h 15min
- Total marks
- 90
- Weighting
- 70%
- Question types
- Data Interpretation and Calculation, Identification, Short Explanation with Diagram/PPC, Draw Supply-Demand Diagram, Structured Analysis, Evaluative Discussion, Definition, Explanation, Analysis, Discussion
Analysis is paraphrased for study purposes. Always verify against the official examiner report and mark scheme.