ECONOMICS · Pearson Edexcel IGCSE
ECONOMICS/21
Paper 2
Economics · 2023 · Variant 1
Relative difficulty
Analysis source: Pearson Edexcel
Analysis aligned to the official syllabus and assessment design.
3.4 / 5
160
180 min
Government policies and fiscal/supply-side interventions
Cohort performance
Session statistics from official examination reports
Total marks
160
Duration
180 min
Session difficulty
3.4 / 5
Key examiner messages
Top priorities from the principal examiner before you revise
Analysis of student performance reveals that significant marks are consistently lost on short-tariff questions through simple omission errors.
For instance, in quantitative tasks like calculating percentage changes in fiscal deficits or price elasticity of supply, candidates often forfeited a mark by omitting units (e.g., the percent sign % ).
In definition questions, such as explaining 'exports' or 'globalisation', the mark scheme strictly requires a two-part explanation; vague definitions or answers relying purely on examples failed to score full marks.
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.
Quantitative
Weight: 7100%Diagrammatic
Weight: 686%Application of
Weight: 571%Logical Chains
Weight: 457%Evaluative Recommendations
Weight: 229%Balance
Weight: 114%
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
Examiner report — national grade boundaries and question-level commentary
Level 9
Approx. 76% of maximum mark
Level 8
Approx. 69% of maximum mark
Level 7
Approx. 63% of maximum mark
Level 6
Approx. 58% of maximum mark
Level 5
Approx. 53% of maximum mark
Level 4
Approx. 48% of maximum mark
Level 3
Approx. 41% of maximum mark
Level 2
Approx. 34% 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
Match the expected response style for “Define” questions.
Match the expected response style for “State” questions.
Show formula, substitution, and unit; method marks need visible working.
Give reasons and link mechanism to outcome; each point needs a because/so chain.
Break into parts and explain how each contributes to the whole question focus.
Match the expected response style for “Assess” questions.
Weigh arguments for and against with evidence; end with a supported judgement.
Time traps
Sections where candidates spent disproportionate time relative to marks
Min per mark: 2
Syllabus traceability
Topics linked to questions and mark weighting in this session
Government policies
45 marks this session
International trade
17 marks this session
The economic problem
16 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
Government policies
International trade
Macroeconomic objectives
Relationships between objectives and policies
Elasticity
The economic problem
The labour market
Externalities
Difficulty trend
How session difficulty has shifted across recent years
Paper comparison
Marks and duration breakdown across papers in this session
Paper 1: Microeconomics and Business Economics:
Paper 2: Macroeconomics and the Global Economy:
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
Government policies
45 marks this session
Practise in RevuiInternational trade
17 marks this session
Practise in RevuiThe economic problem
16 marks this session
Practise in RevuiSelf-diagnostic checklist
Key actions before you sit this paper — copy and tick off as you revise
- 1Message
Analysis of student performance reveals that significant marks are consistently lost on short-tariff questions through simple omission errors.
- 2Message
For instance, in quantitative tasks like calculating percentage changes in fiscal deficits or price elasticity of supply, candidates often forfeited a mark by omitting units (e.g., the percent sign % ).
- 3Message
In definition questions, such as explaining 'exports' or 'globalisation', the mark scheme strictly requires a two-part explanation; vague definitions or answers relying purely on examples failed to score full marks.
Teacher briefing pack
One-page session summary for tutors and classroom review
2023 2023
Economics
Analysis of student performance reveals that significant marks are consistently lost on short-tariff questions through simple omission errors. For instance, in quantitative tasks like calculating percentage changes in fiscal deficits or price elasticity of supply, candidates ofte
Analysis of student performance reveals that significant marks are consistently lost on short-tariff questions through simple omission errors.
For instance, in quantitative tasks like calculating percentage changes in fiscal deficits or price elasticity of supply, candidates often forfeited a mark by omitting units (e.g., the percent sign % ).
In definition questions, such as explaining 'exports' or 'globalisation', the mark scheme strictly requires a two-part explanation; vague definitions or answers relying purely on examples failed to score full marks.
- Total marks
- 160
- Duration
- 180 min
- Session difficulty
- 3.4 / 5
Session analysis
Analysis of student performance reveals that significant marks are consistently lost on short-tariff questions through simple omission errors. For instance, in quantitative tasks like calculating percentage changes in fiscal deficits or price elasticity of supply, candidates often forfeited a mark by omitting units (e.g., the percent sign % ). In definition questions, such as explaining 'exports' or 'globalisation', the mark scheme strictly requires a two-part explanation; vague definitions or answers relying purely on examples failed to score full marks.
Updated Jun 13, 2026
Paper breakdown
Paper 1: Microeconomics and Business Economics:
Paper 2: Macroeconomics and the Global Economy:
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.
63% 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.
Analysis
(6 marks)
36·6·21%
Assessment
(9 marks)
36·4·21%
Definitions and States
24·15·14%
Evaluation
(12 marks)
24·2·14%
Explanation
(3 marks)
15·5·9%
Multiple Choice
12·12·7%
Diagram Drawing
12·4·7%
Calculations
10·5·6%
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 Question 1
0.50 m/minTotal marks
5
Total time
10 min
Avg pace
0.50
Next-year prediction
Topics worth watching next year, with the reason shown directly below each bar.
Cross Elasticity of Demand (XED)
5%5%
Monetary Policy Transmission Mechanisms
4%4%
Exchange Rate Systems (Fixed vs Floating)
4%4%
Examiner notes & key calculations
- Deficit Confusion: A recurring pitfall in Paper 2 was the confusion between a fiscal deficit (government spending exceeding tax revenue) and a current account deficit (trade value of imports exceeding exports). Many candidates wrote long, well-argued paragraphs about the wrong concept, scoring zero.
- Evaluating in 'Analyse' Questions: For the 6-mark analysis questions, no marks are allocated for evaluation. Candidates who tried to show both sides of the argument wasted valuable time that should have been spent developing a deep, single-sided chain of reasoning.
- Alternative Policies Placement: In the 12-mark evaluation questions (such as environmental subsidies), candidates must fully evaluate the specified concept before offering alternative mechanisms. Jumping straight to alternatives turns the essay into a simple list of options, capping the accessible marks.
Analysis is paraphrased for study purposes. Always verify against the official examiner report and mark scheme.