Last updated 2026-07-21 — the article text's own revision date; dated evidence on this page carries its own check date. See the Citation Ledger at the foot for this page's sources.
CompTIA Security+ does not have a source-backed public pass-rate percentage in RoleMath's reviewed evidence. The exam figures on this page were re-verified against the live official page on 2026-07-21; exam details can change, so confirm the current values on the vendor's official page before you rely on them. That means RoleMath will not reuse old contradictory percentages, average prep-provider claims, or imply your personal odds. Use the evidence that is actually decision-useful: official exam structure and domains, role tasks, occupation pay/outlook context, qualitative employer-language samples, AI-impact caveats, and a study plan that proves readiness.
Key takeaways
- RoleMath's current reviewed evidence does not support a public CompTIA Security+ candidate pass-rate percentage.
- The old contradictory online pass-rate ranges were removed because they were not URL-backed ledger evidence for this page.
- our published Security+ data records SY0-701, maximum 90 questions, 90 minutes, mixed multiple-choice/performance-based format, a passing score of 750 on a scale of 100-900, 439 USD exam voucher, and five domain weights.
- The exam figures on this page were re-verified against the live official page on 2026-07-21; exam details can change, so confirm the current values on the vendor's official page before you rely on them.
- BLS pay/outlook figures are occupation context for Information Security Analysts, not Security+ salary, ROI, or placement outcomes.
- Employer-language samples can guide vocabulary and portfolio planning, but they are not market-share or demand claims.
- AI can help with study review and scenario practice, but learners need to verify outputs against labs, logs, official docs, or known frameworks.
More on CompTIA Security+
- Is CompTIA Security+ worth it?
- Is CompTIA Security+ hard?
- CompTIA Security+ salary context
- CompTIA Security+ certification page
The short answer
Do not plan around a Security+ pass-rate percentage. RoleMath's current pass-rate ledger does not contain an official CompTIA candidate pass-rate figure for Security+. It contains official exam facts that were re-verified against the live CompTIA page on 2026-07-21, and the reviewed official page does not publish a candidate pass-rate percentage.
The safe public answer is: RoleMath does not publish a Security+ pass rate. If CompTIA later publishes a candidate pass-rate percentage with a clear denominator, date range, candidate population, and attempt type, it can be added to the ledger. Until then, a confident percentage from a prep page is not a planning fact.
For a learner, the better question is not 'what percent pass?' It is 'what official topics and job evidence tell me how to prepare?' Security+ is most useful when it is connected to hands-on security operations, risk, incident-response, network, identity, and documentation practice.
Official Security+ facts in the sources cited here
| Security+ fact | Current RoleMath source-backed value | How to use it |
|---|---|---|
| Exam code | SY0-701 | Confirms the active exam identity in our published data. |
| Question count | Maximum of 90 | Pacing input, not pass-rate evidence. |
| Time limit | 90 minutes | Practice-test timing input. |
| Format | Mixed multiple-choice and performance-based questions | Study plan should include applied scenarios. |
| Passing score | 750 on a scale of 100-900 (live-verified 2026-07-21) | Score-target context, not pass-rate evidence. |
| Exam voucher | 439 USD for one exam | Budget input, not outcome evidence. |
| Prerequisites | No prerequisite stated in our published data | Open registration does not mean beginner-easy. |
| Recommended background | Network+ plus about two years of security or systems-administration experience | Preparation context, not a registration requirement. |
| Public candidate pass rate | Not published on the reviewed official page (checked 2026-07-21) | Do not publish a percentage. |
The source posture is current: the Security+ exam facts above were re-verified against the live official CompTIA page on 2026-07-21. Exam details can change, so confirm the current values on the vendor's official page before you rely on them.
Exam domains matter more than a pass-rate percentage
| SY0-701 domain | Weight | Planning implication |
|---|---|---|
| General security concepts | 12% | Know the vocabulary, but do not over-study definitions alone. |
| Threats, vulnerabilities, and mitigations | 22% | Practice identifying attacks, weaknesses, and practical controls. |
| Security architecture | 18% | Connect network, cloud, identity, and system design choices. |
| Security operations | 28% | Spend the most time on monitoring, response, access, hardening, and troubleshooting scenarios. |
| Security program management and oversight | 20% | Understand policy, risk, compliance, governance, and communication. |
This domain table is more useful than a fake pass rate because it tells you where the exam is weighted. A study plan that ignores security operations and program oversight is weak even if it memorizes vocabulary. A plan that includes applied labs, incident notes, access-control scenarios, and risk writeups fits the exam shape better.
Pass-rate claim ledger
| Ledger item | Confidence | Public treatment |
|---|---|---|
| Official CompTIA Security+ page | Medium | Official exam facts re-verified against the live page on 2026-07-21; confirm current values before relying on them. |
| Official Security+ pass-rate percentage | None in current reviewed evidence | Do not publish a percentage. |
| Third-party Security+ pass-rate folklore | Not ledger-ready for this page | Do not quote old percentage ranges without exact URL, retrieval date, denominator, and claim text. |
The previous article repeated conflicting online percentage ranges. That is exactly what this rewrite removes. If a future review collects third-party Security+ pass-rate examples, they belong in the ledger as debunking examples only, with exact source URLs and source text. They should not become RoleMath's number.
A real pass-rate source would need to say what population it measures: all candidates, first attempts, retakes, training-provider students, self-reported forum users, or something else. Without that denominator, the number is not interpretable.
What to use instead
Use four evidence layers instead of a pass-rate percentage.
| Evidence layer | What it answers | What it cannot answer |
|---|---|---|
| Official CompTIA facts | What SY0-701 covers, how long it is, how many questions it can include, and what it costs | Your personal odds of passing |
| O*NET tasks | What cybersecurity analyst work looks like beyond the exam | Whether Security+ alone will get you hired |
| BLS occupation context | Pay and outlook context for Information Security Analysts | Security+ salary, ROI, or placement |
| Employer-language sample | The vocabulary appearing in RoleMath's public posting pilot | Representative demand or market share |
This is the RoleMath rule for pass-rate pages: replace unsupported percentages with official facts, role evidence, and explicit claim boundaries. That gives the learner something they can act on without pretending we know an outcome statistic we do not have.
Role and day-to-day context
RoleMath maps Security+ most directly to cybersecurity analyst, SOC analyst, incident response, and security operations preparation signals. That does not mean the certificate equals the job. It means the exam's skill domain overlaps with the work a learner is likely trying to enter.
O*NET's Information Security Analysts tasks make the work concrete: safeguarding computer files against unauthorized modification or disclosure, monitoring virus reports, using encryption and firewalls, performing risk assessments, modifying access or security files, reviewing violations of security procedures, discussing access and security issues with users, and documenting security measures.
Those tasks show why Security+ preparation should include more than flashcards. A learner should be able to explain a control, apply it in a scenario, document the risk, and communicate what changed. That is closer to analyst work than repeating a pass-rate statistic.
Pay and outlook context
The BLS context here is occupation-level, not a Security+ outcome. RoleMath's current Information Security Analysts sample uses BLS OEWS May 2025 national data with 190,650 employment and a $129,180 national median annual wage. The same role sample uses BLS Employment Projections for 2024-2034 showing 28.5% projected employment change and 16,000 annual openings.
Those are useful signals, but they do not say Security+ causes that salary or guarantees access to those openings. The occupation has many entry paths and experience levels. Some postings name Security+; many also require hands-on SIEM, incident response, cloud, identity, scripting, vulnerability management, communication, and documentation evidence.
Use the BLS figures to understand the occupation family. Use the exam facts and employer-language sample to decide what to practice next. Do not combine them into a Security+ ROI claim.
Employer-language snapshot
RoleMath's cybersecurity employer-language evidence is a public-posting pilot, not a representative market study. The cybersecurity analyst sample has a sample of 64 public postings, including 35 public-ready rows. In that sample, certification mentions included Security+ 12, CySA+ 6, CCNA 4, Network+ 1, and PMP 1. Skill and content language included Cybersecurity 40, NIST 22, SIEM 20, Incident response 16, threat intelligence 13, FedRAMP 11, Python 10, AWS 10, Azure 10, vulnerability management 8, Splunk 8, EDR 7, and CrowdStrike 7.
The SOC analyst sample has a sample of 77 public postings. In that sample, Security+ and CySA+ each appeared 10 times, while skill language included Cybersecurity 61, SIEM 53, Incident response 48, EDR 44, threat intelligence 42, threat hunting 36, Splunk 30, Python 26, AWS 24, Azure 24, CrowdStrike 22, PowerShell 21, and Linux 17.
Use this as vocabulary, not demand. It does not mean a fixed percentage of employers require Security+. It does show the study plan should not stop at the certificate: build SIEM, alert triage, incident response, cloud, identity, and scripting evidence.
AI-impact context
AI does not create a Security+ pass rate. It changes how security work and Security+ preparation should be practiced. RoleMath's cybersecurity analyst AI-usage context uses Anthropic Economic Index context and reports the shared SOC sample as roughly 24% augmentation-style and 76% automation-style usage Claude conversations for May 2026. That is descriptive usage data, not a job-loss forecast, demand forecast, or personal career-risk score.
For Security+ prep, AI can explain concepts, generate practice questions, help compare controls, summarize a log snippet, or draft an incident timeline. It can also invent tool behavior, miss environment-specific context, or overstate certainty. The useful candidate verifies the answer against a lab, official docs, sample/log evidence, or a known framework.
A strong AI-aware Security+ portfolio note is simple: take one security operations scenario, ask AI for a response checklist, run the scenario in a lab or simulated log set, mark what was correct, mark what was incomplete, and explain what evidence changed your decision. That demonstrates judgment.
Study path steps
| Step | What to do | Evidence to keep |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Split the SY0-701 domains into a weekly plan | A domain checklist with the five weights visible |
| 2 | Treat security operations as the largest study block | Alert notes, access-control scenarios, hardening checklists, and incident timelines |
| 3 | Pair definitions with applied examples | One example control, one risk, one log or system artifact, and one plain-English explanation |
| 4 | Practice performance-based question style | Screenshots or notes from labs, not copied exam content |
| 5 | Use AI as a reviewer, not the source of truth | A verification note showing what AI suggested, what you checked, and what you rejected |
| 6 | Compare target postings to your portfolio | A vocabulary list from local roles, labeled as qualitative research, not market demand |
| 7 | Schedule when weak domains are boringly repeatable | Missed-domain log, timing notes, and retake-budget decision |
This plan is more actionable than a pass-rate number. It gives a learner inputs they can control: coverage, lab practice, scenario reasoning, documentation, verification, and timing.
Honest bottom line
Do not trust a Security+ pass-rate percentage unless CompTIA publishes it and defines the measurement. RoleMath's current reviewed evidence does not support one: we read the official CompTIA page successfully on 2026-07-21, and the reviewed official page does not publish a candidate pass rate.
Use what the evidence can support: SY0-701 exam structure, domain weights, cost, recommended background, O*NET task context, BLS occupation context, qualitative employer language, and AI-aware study practice.
Security+ can be a useful baseline security signal when paired with hands-on evidence. It is not a salary claim, job guarantee, placement statistic, market-demand percentage, or personal pass probability.
Frequently asked questions
What is the CompTIA Security+ pass rate?
RoleMath does not publish a Security+ pass rate because the current reviewed evidence does not contain an official CompTIA public candidate pass-rate percentage.
Does CompTIA publish the Security+ passing score?
Yes. The reviewed official page states a passing score of 750 on a scale of 100-900 for SY0-701; this was re-verified against the live official page on 2026-07-21. Exam details can change, so confirm the current values on the vendor's official page before you rely on them.
Can I trust Security+ pass-rate percentages online?
Do not treat them as planning facts unless the source defines the denominator, time window, candidate population, attempt type, and data owner. A prep-provider percentage is not an official CompTIA pass rate.
What should I use instead of a Security+ pass rate?
Use official exam facts, the SY0-701 domain weights, a hands-on study plan, O*NET task context, BLS occupation context, qualitative employer language, and AI-aware verification practice.
Does Security+ guarantee a cybersecurity job?
No. Security+ can be a useful baseline signal, but it does not guarantee a job, salary, interview, placement, or personal pass probability.
How does AI change Security+ preparation?
AI can help explain concepts, draft checklists, and review scenarios, but it can also be wrong. Use it as a reviewer and verify output against labs, logs, official docs, and known frameworks.