The SQE's attainment gap: what the data shows

If you've searched for the SQE attainment gap, you've probably already seen a headline number and wondered how reliable it is. It's real, published by the regulator itself, and tracked since the exam's first sitting. Here's what the SRA's own data and commissioned research actually say.

The short version

The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) publishes pass rates broken down by ethnicity alongside every SQE statistical report. Across multiple sittings since SQE1 launched in 2021, white candidates have passed at meaningfully higher rates than Black and Asian candidates. The gap has shown up consistently, in SQE1 and SQE2 alike, though its size has moved between sittings.

The SRA hasn't downplayed this. It commissioned the University of Exeter to research the causes, published a systematic literature review in June 2023, and followed up with modelling work from its assessment provider Kaplan on what does and doesn't explain the gap. The honest answer so far: several factors combine to produce it, and a large share of the variation remains unexplained by anything currently measured.

What the published pass-rate data shows

The SRA releases a statistical report after each SQE1 and SQE2 sitting, including a breakdown by candidate ethnicity alongside the headline pass rate. Reported gaps between white and Black candidates have run into the tens of percentage points in some sittings, with Asian candidates typically landing between the two. The precise numbers move sitting to sitting, the same way the overall pass rate does (see our explainer on reading pass-rate swings for why single-sitting figures need care).

A few patterns have held across multiple reports:

• White candidates have posted the highest overall pass rates in both SQE1 and SQE2 in every sitting reported to date.
• Black candidates have posted the lowest overall pass rates of the major ethnicity groups the SRA reports on, by a wide margin in some sittings.
• Asian and Asian British candidates have typically passed at rates between the White and Black figures.
• The gap has appeared in both SQE1 (multiple-choice) and SQE2 (skills stations), which rules out "it's just a multiple-choice problem" as a full explanation.

Because the exact gap varies by sitting and exam part, check the SRA's most recent statistical report for current figures rather than treating any one sitting's numbers as fixed. What's stayed consistent isn't a specific number; it's the direction and persistence of the gap itself.

The SRA's own research into why

Publishing the data was only the first step. In December 2021, before the first SQE sittings had even finished, the SRA commissioned an interdisciplinary team at the University of Exeter (law, business and psychology academics) to investigate why the gap exists. That's worth noting: this was commissioned proactively, anticipating that a gap similar to the one already documented in the old Legal Practice Course (LPC) and Bar exams was likely to appear in the SQE too.

The Exeter team's first output was a systematic literature review, published in June 2023, covering existing research on differential outcomes in legal professional assessments across disciplines. The SRA describes it as the first review of its kind to pull together cross-disciplinary evidence on this question. The headline conclusion: no single cause explains the gap; multiple factors, operating together, do. The wider Exeter programme also gathered survey responses from over a thousand law degree and LPC students, plus dozens of interviews with students, solicitors, educators and firms.

Later modelling by Kaplan (the SRA's assessment delivery partner), reported in the SRA's "SQE: Four Years On" review, tried to quantify how much score variation ethnicity alone could statistically account for. The figure reported was a single-digit percentage of overall score variance for SQE1, smaller again for SQE2: a meaningful but partial contributor. The much larger share of the variation remains unexplained by the demographic and background data the SRA currently collects.

Ethnicity itself isn't a direct cause of exam performance; it correlates with a cluster of other factors, some measured, many not, that plausibly affect preparation and performance. And "most of the gap is unexplained" is not the same as "there is no gap." The pass rate difference in the published data is real regardless of how much current models can explain.

What the research points to as contributing factors

The SRA's published research points to a mix of factors researchers associate with differential outcomes in professional assessments generally, not just the SQE:

• Educational and financial background. Prior attainment and socioeconomic circumstances correlate with exam performance across many professional qualifications, and correlate with ethnicity in the UK population too, which complicates isolating ethnicity as an independent factor.
• Confidence in career prospects. Qualitative research suggests candidates less certain their qualification will translate into a job offer may prepare or perform differently under assessment conditions, though this is harder to measure than a pass mark.
• Access to funded, structured preparation. Course format and cost vary widely (see our comparison of SQE prep providers), and access to firm-sponsored study versus self-funded study around a job is not evenly distributed.
• Format familiarity. Some research on professional assessments generally points to prior exposure to similar formats as a contributing factor, though the SRA treats this as one strand among several.

None of these fully explains the gap alone, and the SRA's research is explicit that it hasn't identified a complete causal picture: an honest position for a regulator to hold, even if unsatisfying for anyone wanting a tidy answer.

What the SRA says it's doing about it

Alongside the research, the SRA publishes equality, diversity and inclusion monitoring and says it will keep tracking outcomes by ethnicity at every sitting. It also points to candidate diversity data showing SQE candidates are, as a cohort, more ethnically diverse than the qualified solicitor population, which it frames as evidence the route itself isn't closing the door before candidates sit the exam. Whether that entry-level diversity converts into equal pass rates is the gap this research is trying to close.

For anyone assessing the SQE as a route, the takeaway isn't that the data should be ignored. A published gap in cohort-level pass rates describes patterns across a large group, not what will happen to any individual candidate. Preparation, practice under realistic conditions, and honest tracking of your own topic coverage remain the levers within a candidate's control. A free SQE study planner that tracks your own syllabus coverage gives you something a demographic breakdown can't: a personal, current picture of where you actually stand.

If you're building a study plan and want the surrounding logistics sorted first, see what the SQE costs and the SQE dates for 2026-27. For more on reading SRA pass-rate data properly, cohort pass rates, decoded is the companion piece to this one.

Frequently asked questions

Does the SQE have a pass rate gap by ethnicity?

Yes. The SRA's statistical reports, published after every sitting, show white candidates passing SQE1 and SQE2 at higher rates than Black and Asian candidates in every sitting reported so far. Gap size varies by sitting; check the SRA's latest statistical report for current figures.

Why is there an attainment gap in the SQE?

The SRA commissioned the University of Exeter to research this, publishing a systematic literature review in June 2023. Its conclusion: no single factor explains the gap. Educational and financial background, confidence in career prospects, and access to structured preparation all combine to produce it. Later modelling attributed only a small, single-digit share of score variance directly to ethnicity, leaving most of the gap unexplained.

Is the attainment gap unique to the SQE?

No. Similar gaps by ethnicity were documented in the SQE's predecessor, the Legal Practice Course (LPC), and in the Bar course, part of why the SRA commissioned research proactively rather than waiting for the pattern to appear in SQE data first.

Does the attainment gap mean an individual candidate is less likely to pass?

Not in a way that applies to any one person. A cohort-level gap describes patterns across large groups and reflects structural and background factors researchers haven't fully unpicked. It isn't a prediction about an individual's result, which depends far more on that candidate's own preparation.

Where can I read the SRA's original research?

The SRA publishes its SQE statistical reports and its Exeter-commissioned research, including the June 2023 literature review and the "SQE: Four Years On" report, on its research and publications pages at sra.org.uk. Those are the primary sources for exact figures, rather than any secondary summary including this one.