PURE-MATHEMATICS-XPM01 · Pearson Edexcel International AS Level
PURE-MATHEMATICS-XPM01/22
Paper 2
Pure Mathematics XPM01 · Winter 2026 · Variant 2
Relative difficulty
Analysis source: Pearson Edexcel
Analysis aligned to the official syllabus and assessment design.
3.0 / 5
150
180 min
Algebra and Functions & Sequence Applications
Cohort performance
Session statistics from official examination reports
Total marks
150
Duration
180 min
Session difficulty
3.0 / 5
Key examiner messages
Top priorities from the principal examiner before you revise
The January 2026 Pure Mathematics (XPM01) series is a fair yet testing assessment.
While the early questions in both papers provide accessible marks, the later questions introduce algebraic friction and multi-step reasoning.
P1 is dominated by algebraic manipulation and graphing, whereas P2 demands sophisticated logical links between sequences, trigonometry, and calculus optimization.
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.
Algebraic Manipulation
Weight: 9100%Graphical Interpretation
Weight: 778%Calculus Application
Weight: 556%Trigonometric
Weight: 333%Numerical
Weight: 222%Modeling
Weight: 111%
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 A
Approx. 80% of maximum mark
Level B
Approx. 70% of maximum mark
Level C
Approx. 60% of maximum mark
Level D
Approx. 50% of maximum mark
Level E
Approx. 40% 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 “Find” questions.
Match the expected response style for “Show” questions.
Match the expected response style for “Solve” questions.
Match the expected response style for “State” questions.
Match the expected response style for “Sketch” questions.
Support your choice with specific evidence from data or the scenario given.
Time traps
Sections where candidates spent disproportionate time relative to marks
Min per mark: 1.3
Min per mark: 1.2
Min per mark: 1.2
Syllabus traceability
Topics linked to questions and mark weighting in this session
Algebra and functions (Unit P1)
34 marks this session
Sequences and series (Unit P2)
21 marks this session
Trigonometry (Unit P1)
15 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
Algebra and functions (Unit P1)
Algebra and functions (Unit P1: Pure Mathematics 1)
Sequences and series (Unit P2)
Trigonometry (Unit P1: Pure Mathematics 1)
Sequences and series (Unit P2: Pure Mathematics 2)
Trigonometry (Unit P1)
Integration (Unit P2: Pure Mathematics 2)
Integration (Unit P1)
Paper comparison
Marks and duration breakdown across papers in this session
WMA11/01A Pure Mathematics P1: WMA12/01A Pure Mathematics P2:
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
Algebra and functions (Unit P1)
34 marks this session
Practise in RevuiSequences and series (Unit P2)
21 marks this session
Practise in RevuiTrigonometry (Unit P1)
15 marks this session
Practise in RevuiSelf-diagnostic checklist
Key actions before you sit this paper — copy and tick off as you revise
- 1Message
The January 2026 Pure Mathematics (XPM01) series is a fair yet testing assessment.
- 2Message
While the early questions in both papers provide accessible marks, the later questions introduce algebraic friction and multi-step reasoning.
- 3Message
P1 is dominated by algebraic manipulation and graphing, whereas P2 demands sophisticated logical links between sequences, trigonometry, and calculus optimization.
Teacher briefing pack
One-page session summary for tutors and classroom review
Winter 2026 2026
Pure Mathematics XPM01
The January 2026 Pure Mathematics (XPM01) series is a fair yet testing assessment. While the early questions in both papers provide accessible marks, the later questions introduce algebraic friction and multi-step reasoning. P1 is dominated by algebraic manipulation and graphing,
The January 2026 Pure Mathematics (XPM01) series is a fair yet testing assessment.
While the early questions in both papers provide accessible marks, the later questions introduce algebraic friction and multi-step reasoning.
P1 is dominated by algebraic manipulation and graphing, whereas P2 demands sophisticated logical links between sequences, trigonometry, and calculus optimization.
- Total marks
- 150
- Duration
- 180 min
- Session difficulty
- 3.0 / 5
Session analysis
The January 2026 Pure Mathematics (XPM01) series is a fair yet testing assessment. While the early questions in both papers provide accessible marks, the later questions introduce algebraic friction and multi-step reasoning. P1 is dominated by algebraic manipulation and graphing, whereas P2 demands sophisticated logical links between sequences, trigonometry, and calculus optimization.
Updated Jun 12, 2026
Paper breakdown
WMA11/01A Pure Mathematics P1: WMA12/01A Pure Mathematics P2:
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.
80% 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.
Complex Problem Solving / Applied Modeling
63·10·42%
Multi-step Algebraic Solution
52·14·35%
Show That / Proof
24·8·16%
Single-step Calculation / State
11·8·7%
Study ROI
Bigger bubbles recur more often; higher bubbles carry more marks, helping you rank revision priorities.
Difficulty trend
Compare difficulty across recent years.
Time vs marks
Compare marks with suggested time allocation to plan exam pacing.
P1 Questions 1-5 (I
0.82 m/minP1 Questions 6-10 (
0.84 m/minP2 Questions 1-5 (S
0.80 m/minTotal marks
107
Total time
130 min
Avg pace
0.82
Next-year prediction
Topics worth watching next year, with the reason shown directly below each bar.
Exponential modeling and growth/decay systems
90%90%
Trigonometric Identities & General Proof
82%82%
Difficulty Verdict
The January 2026 Pure Mathematics (XPM01) series is a fair yet testing assessment. While the early questions in both papers provide accessible marks, the later questions introduce algebraic friction and multi-step reasoning. P1 is dominated by algebraic manipulation and graphing, whereas P2 demands sophisticated logical links between sequences, trigonometry, and calculus optimization.
Where the Marks Are
The core of both papers lies in high-yield topics. In P1, Algebra and Functions constitutes nearly half of the marks (34 out of 75), covering quadratics, inequalities, indices, surds, and transformations. In P2, the weight is shared across Sequences and Series (21 marks) and Trigonometry. Mastering circular coordinate geometry and optimization equations accounts for a critical portion of the remaining marks, making standard algebra skills the foundation of scoring well.
Examiner notes & key calculations
- The Calculator Trap: The instruction 'Solutions relying on calculator technology are not acceptable' was heavily enforced. In WMA11/01A Q1(b) and Q2(i), candidates who wrote down roots or index solutions without showing intermediate factoring or exponent matching scored zero.
- Integral Transformations: In WMA12/01A Q3(b), many candidates struggled to relate the transformed integral ∫−26(2x+4x+8) dx \int_{-2}^6 (2x + \sqrt{4x+8})\,dx ∫−26(2x+4x+8)dx to their trapezium rule result for ∫−26x+2 dx \int_{-2}^6 \sqrt{x+2}\,dx ∫−26x+2dx. Successful candidates split the integral and recognized that 4x+8=2x+2 \sqrt{4x+8} = 2\sqrt{x+2} 4x+8=2x+2.
- Circle Geometry Coordinates: Finding the coordinates of point W W W in WMA12/01A Q6(d) via diametrical relationships or vector steps proved highly challenging, with many making sign slips or failing to construct a clear geometric path.
Analysis is paraphrased for study purposes. Always verify against the official examiner report and mark scheme.