Economics drew 341 candidates in CSS 2025 and allocated 4 of them, an overall conversion of just over 1%. The paper sits a little below the field average at 34.5%, though still above the passing line, so the scarcity of allocations reflects a thin written pass and a demanding merit cut. Only nine candidates cleared the written stage from the full field.
Of the four allocated candidates, one was a woman and three were men, a 25% female share in a sample too small to read as a trend. The figure simply records the outcome for four individuals.
Economics' mean of 34.5% trails the CSS optional-subject average of 43.5% by 9 points, placing it among the harder-scoring papers in the examination. Candidates with quantitative backgrounds sometimes expect it to play to their strengths, but the low mean suggests the paper is more demanding than that assumption allows. Because it sits below the field average, clearing 33% already lifts a candidate above most of the pack, yet with only 4 seats a bare pass is far from secure. The sensible target is to score clearly above the narrow margin the mean sits at.
Of the 341 who appeared, 9 passed the written stage and 4 of those were allocated. Because the mean of 34.5% sits just above the 33% threshold, the paper is marginally clear of being the principal barrier, but the low written pass count shows how few candidates reached a confident passing standard. The further drop to 4 allocations completed the filtering at the merit stage.
At 34.5% of the 200 available marks the mean clears the passing line only narrowly, and the median, close behind at 36% of max, sits near it, suggesting a balanced distribution sitting low. A standard deviation of 28 marks, around 14 percentage points, is wide, placing a candidate one deviation below the mean at 20.5%, well short of passing. This is a moderate-risk paper where the average candidate just clears the line but the broad spread drops a large share below it. Because the mean sits so close to the threshold, modest improvements in preparation translate directly into the difference between passing and failing.
Punjab took 2 of the 4 seats, with Balochistan and Sindh Rural taking one each. With only four allocations the distribution carries little weight beyond recording where the small number of successful candidates came from.
Economics rewards candidates with a genuine command of both theory and its analytical application, and the 2025 figures show how few reached that standard. Four allocations from 341 applicants is a thin record, and the mean barely clears the passing line. This is a subject to attempt from real strength in the discipline rather than on the assumption that numeracy alone will carry it.