BackCSS 2025 Results

Statistics

Statistics drew 116 candidates in CSS 2025 and allocated a single one of them. The paper is reasonably scoreable, with a mean of 46% above the field average, so the lone allocation reflects a very thin written pass and a hard merit cut rather than a difficult exam. Only two candidates cleared the written stage from the full field.

1.72%Written pass rate
116Candidates appeared
50%Written → allocated
Low Competition
0% female allocated in this subject51% CSS average↓ Under-represented

Score Distribution

46.0%Mean score46 / 100 marks
47.5%Median score48 / 100 marks
±24.0%Std deviation±24 marks
MeanMedian±1 std dev33% pass threshold
Moderate scoring risk — mean clears bar, but weaker scorers may fall below 33%

The mean of 46% clears the passing line by 13 points, and with the median almost identical at 47.5% the distribution is fairly symmetric and sits well above the threshold. A standard deviation of 24 points is very wide, however, placing a candidate one deviation below the mean at 22%, well short of passing. That makes this a moderate-risk paper despite the strong average, because the large spread drops a substantial share below the line. The high mean coexists with real volatility, so consistent accuracy is what keeps a candidate safely above the threshold.

Provincial Breakdown

The lone allocation went to a Punjab candidate, with no other province securing a seat. One allocation provides no distribution to interpret beyond recording the single successful candidate's province.

Gender Distribution

Of allocated candidates
0%
Female
100%
Male
1 total allocated

The one allocated candidate was a man, making the female share zero in a sample of a single seat. No conclusion about gendered conversion can be drawn from one outcome.

Subject vs CSS Average

Statistics' mean of 46% sits 2.5 points above the CSS optional-subject average of 43.5%, marking it as a slightly above-average paper to score in. The favourable mean is largely beside the point given the outcome, since the subject produced only one allocation from 116 candidates. A strong average drawn from a field where almost no one cleared the written stage tells a candidate little about their genuine prospects.

Candidate Pipeline

98% failed written50% not allocated
Overall conversion: 0.9% of appeared candidates allocated

Of the 116 who appeared, 2 passed the written stage and 1 was allocated. With a mean of 46% sitting above the 33% threshold, the paper is not the obstacle, yet only two candidates reached a passing standard and just one survived the merit cut. A single allocation from 116 leaves no margin at all.

Statistics suits candidates with a strong quantitative foundation who can deliver accurate, complete solutions under exam pressure, and even they should weigh the 2025 record. One allocation from 116 applicants is a stark figure. The scoreable paper is not the opportunity it looks like, because almost no candidate converted it into a seat.

Share this analysis:

Ready to Make Your CSS Choice?

Get your personalised subject selection recommendation backed by the data above.