Official analysis of GARP’s FRM Part II curriculum updates for 2026, highlighting
additions, deletions, renumbering, and learning objective (LO) modifications across
all six subject areas, based on published curriculum change logs.
Curriculum evolution in 2026 is incremental and targeted, not a structural rewrite.
Most subjects remain stable, with changes concentrated primarily in Market Risk and Current Issues.
| Subject | Nature of Change |
|---|---|
| Market Risk (MR) | Most active area: reading deletions, additions, reordering, renaming, and multiple learning objective changes |
| Current Issues (CI) | Significant annual refresh with extensive reading rotation |
| Liquidity & Treasury Risk (LR) | Targeted learning objective changes with no change in reading count |
| Investment Management (IM) | No reading changes; limited learning objective refinements only |
| Credit Risk (CR) | One clarified learning objective |
| Operational Risk (OR) | No curriculum or learning objective changes |
| Subject | Weight | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Market Risk | 20% | Content adjusted through new readings and LO updates |
| Credit Risk | 20% | Minor learning objective refinement |
| Operational Risk | 20% | No changes |
| Liquidity Risk | 15% | Targeted learning objective updates only |
| Investment Management | 15% | Learning objective wording updates only |
| Current Issues | 10% | Major topic rotation with new readings |
Strategic study time allocation remains unchanged.
We categorize updates as follows:
Market Risk experienced the largest volume of technical adjustments in 2026.
Deleted
Newly Added
| Deleted Readings | Newly Added Readings |
|---|---|
| MR 6 – Messages from the academic literature on risk measurement for the trading book | MR 6 – Validating Bank Holding Companies’ Value-at-Risk Models for Market Risk |
| MR 7 – Beyond Exceedance-Based Backtesting of Value-at-Risk Models: Methods for Backtesting the Entire Forecasting Distribution Using Probability Integral Transform | |
| MR 16 – The Vasicek and Gauss+ Models |
Multiple readings were renumbered due to insertions, including:
| Current Reading | Previous Reading |
|---|---|
| MR 8 – Correlation Basics: Definitions, Applications, and Terminology | Previously MR 7 |
| MR 9 – Empirical Properties of Correlation: How Do Correlations Behave in the Real World? | Previously MR 8 |
| MR 10 – Financial Correlation Modeling: Bottom-Up Approaches | Previously MR 9 |
| MR 14 – The Art of Term Structure Models: Drift | Previously MR 13 |
| MR 15 – The Art of Term Structure Models: Volatility and Distribution | Previously MR 14 |
| MR 17 – Volatility Smiles | Previously MR 15 |
| MR 18 – Fundamental Review of the Trading Book | Previously MR 16 |
| Current Reading | Earlier Known As |
|---|---|
| MR 11 – Regression Hedging and Principal Component Analysis (2025) | MR 10 – Empirical Approaches to Risk Metrics and Hedging (2024) |
| MR 12 – Arbitrage Pricing with Term Structure Models | MR 11 – The Science of Term Structure Models (2024) |
| MR 13 – Expectations, Risk Premium, Convexity, and the Shape of the Term Structure | MR 12 – The Evolution of Short Rates and the Shape of the Term Structure |
| Chapter | Old Learning Objective | New Learning Objective |
|---|---|---|
| MR 5 – Backtesting VaR | Explain and demonstrate how the mapping process captures general and specific risks. | Explain how the mapping process captures general and specific risks, and calculate these risks in a portfolio given a set of primitive risk factors. |
| MR 11 – Regression Hedging and Principal Component Analysis | N/A (Newly Added Objective) | Explain why and how a regression hedge differs from a hedge based on a reverse regression. |
| MR 13 – Expectations, Risk Premium, Convexity, and the Shape of the Term Structure | Evaluate the impact of changes in maturity, yield, and volatility on the convexity of a security. | Identify the components into which the return on a bond can be decomposed, and calculate the expected return on a bond for a risk-averse investor. |
Implication:
Market Risk content depth has increased, especially in model validation, distributional backtesting, and term structure interpretation.
CR 5 – Introduction to Credit Risk Modeling
| Chapter | Old Learning Objective | New Learning Objective |
|---|---|---|
| CR 5 – Introduction to Credit Risk Modeling and Assessment | Estimate capital adequacy ratio of a financial institution. | Estimate risk-weighted assets and capital adequacy ratio of a financial institution. |
Impact: Clarification, not expansion.
| Category | 2026 vs 2025 Status |
|---|---|
| Readings | No readings added or deleted |
| Learning Objectives | No learning objective changes |
2025 materials remain fully valid for 2026.
| Chapter | Old Learning Objective | New Learning Objective |
|---|---|---|
| LR 5 – Liquidity and Reserves Management: Strategies and Policies | Summarize the process taken by a U.S. bank to calculate its legal reserves. | Deleted |
| LR 16 – US Dollar Shortage in Global Banking and International Policy Response | Discuss how central bank swap agreements overcame challenges commonly associated with international lenders of last resort. | Describe the policy response by international central banks to alleviate the US dollar shortage and assess its effectiveness. |
| LR 19 – Illiquid Assets | Evaluate portfolio choice decisions on the inclusion of illiquid assets. | Evaluate the impact of allocating illiquid assets to a portfolio, including the impact on rebalancing and trading and on optimizing the proportion of illiquid assets. |
No readings added or removed.
| Reading Changes | Status |
|---|---|
| Deleted Readings | None |
| Newly Added Readings | None |
| Chapter | Old Learning Objective | New Learning Objective |
|---|---|---|
| IM 4 – Portfolio Construction | Distinguish among the inputs to the portfolio construction process. | Describe the inputs to the portfolio construction process and explain challenges faced when using these inputs. |
| IM 5 – Portfolio Risks: Analytical Methods | Explain the risk-minimizing position and the risk and return-optimizing position of a portfolio. | Explain and calculate the risk-minimizing position and position that maximizes the ratio of expected return to risk. |
Important Correction:
There is no expansion, relocation, or restructuring of Investment Management in 2026.
| Deleted Readings | Newly Added Readings |
|---|---|
| CI 1 – Review of the Federal Reserve’s Supervision and Regulation of Silicon Valley Bank | CI 1 – 2023 Bank Failures, Preliminary lessons learnt for resolution |
| CI 2 – The Credit Suisse CoCo Wipeout: Facts, Misconceptions, and Lessons for Financial Regulation | CI 2 – Generative Artificial Intelligence in Finance: Risk Considerations |
| CI 3 – Artificial Intelligence and Bank Supervision | CI 3 – Artificial intelligence and the economy: implications for central banks |
| CI 4 – Financial Risk Management and Explainable, Trustworthy, Responsible AI | CI 4 – Interest Rate Risk Management by EME Banks |
| CI 5 – Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework | CI 5 – Laying a robust macro-financial foundation for the future |
| CI 6 – Climate-Related Risk Drivers and their Transmission Channels | CI 6 – The Last Mile: Financial Vulnerabilities and Risks, Reading 2: The Rise and Risks of Private Credit |
| CI 7 – Climate-Related Financial Risks – Measurement Methodologies | CI 7 – Monetary and fiscal policy: safeguarding stability and trust |
| CI 8 – Principles for the Effective Management and Supervision of Climate-Related Financial risks | CI 8 – Regulating the Crypto Ecosystem: The Case of Unbacked Crypto Assets |
| CI 9 – The Crypto Ecosystem: Key Elements and Risks |
2026 CI emphasizes:
This reflects CI’s role as a rotating, policy-driven module, not cumulative knowledge.
| Category | Count |
|---|---|
| New readings added | 11 |
| Readings deleted | 10 |
| Total readings | 104 |
| LOs added | 1 |
| LOs deleted | 2 |
| LOs modified | 7 |
The 2026 FRM Part II curriculum represents a controlled evolution, not a rewrite.
Candidates should update selectively, not indiscriminately, focusing effort where GARP clearly signaled new expectations.