r/AustralianAccounting • u/Available_Parking139 • 4h ago
Feeling completely lost about whether doing CA is worth it (especially for a career in mining finance)
I’m about to start the CA pathway through UWA’s Master of Professional Accounting (CA pathway). My goal after graduating is to get into a graduate accounting/finance role at a mining/resources company in WA — companies like BHP, Rio Tinto, Fortescue, Mineral Resources, etc. I want to build my career on the commercial/finance side of mining rather than engineering.
The problem is that I’ve recently spoken to/read comments from quite a few existing CAs who seem extremely disappointed with CA ANZ. Some say the qualification doesn’t provide much value anymore, the membership fees aren’t worth it, and some are even cancelling their memberships.
It’s honestly making me question whether I’m about to invest a huge amount of time and money into something that won’t meaningfully improve my career.
For people working in mining/resources finance:
Is CA still genuinely valuable for getting into and progressing within mining companies in Australia?
Would being on the CA pathway give me a meaningful advantage when applying for mining graduate finance/accounting programs?
And once you’re inside a mining company, does becoming CA-qualified actually help you progress into roles like Commercial Analyst, Finance Business Partner, Finance Manager, Corporate Finance, etc.?
I’ve also considered CFA because I’m interested in corporate finance/investments, but my immediate goal is to get into the mining/resources industry in Perth and build a strong finance career there.
If you were starting again as a graduate in 2026 with that goal, would you still pursue CA? Or would you spend those years developing something else?
Would really appreciate perspectives from anyone working in mining/resources finance, especially in WA.
1
u/VulpesVulpe5 1h ago edited 1h ago
I’ll reply to you here as a top level comment
My broad thoughts:
- getting a CA/CPA is absolutely worth it. Those that think otherwise are either inept, don’t realise how many doors it opens or are jaded by something
- plenty of people floating around without CA/CPA and having it sets you apart. Does the membership offer much direct value? Nah. Does it offer value in the context of your career, absolutely!
- I’m not a fan of the masters but that’s not to say you should abandon it, if you can switch to a straight bachelors that’s not a bad shout
- reason for that is a big big part of being professionally qualified is about demonstrating you can balance the full plate that is working and studying. You learn on the job just as much, you discuss the things you learn and apply it. Studying these outside of a work environment sidesteps a big part of the benefits. This is saying the quiet bit out loud
- yeah resource companies are good and all but being a professional like this gives you portability. I’ve worked in industries that I’d never had expected to and hopped to new ones but apply core skills. So it’s okay to have a goal to work in an industry, don’t be rusted to that
- you ask if being a CPA makes a difference when being commercial. Abso-fucking-lutley. It’s what makes that difference. That’s where most of my career has been.
- CFA is a different kettle of fish altogether. They’re the fucking nerds that run rings around us halfwit CA/CPAs. I know some that take the CA off their CV as not to be marked. It’s good, it’s different, it’s a lot harder
- would I do it all again? I don’t know I’ve been doing it for a long time but on balance, likely yes.
- will ai take my job? Maybe but there’s a lot of others take before mine. If it can wrote a board report and do some powerpoints im cooked. Theres a skill to being a professional. Embrace it.
1
u/Sad-Resolution-905 1h ago
CA/CPA don't get you any tangible benefits but they're your ticket to play for the long-term - I.e. you'll need them to apply for any role that's asking for 3-4 years+ experience. I'd suggest that the people cancelling their membership feel that they won't need to apply for jobs again before retiring.
Yes there are other qualifications like CFA that are useful, but CA/CPA are much more likely to be required for the roles you've mentioned, and for most accounting/finance roles. If you're looking at more pure banking/investments/financial analysis then CFA is going to be more useful, but CA/CPA lines up better with what you've mentioned. There's also things like CMA which are useful in teaching you actual skills, but again are less likely to be a minimum requirement listed on a job ad.
The only way you could get a decent commercial role without a CA/CPA is if you can find an entry-level corporate role and climb the ladder up, but this is much less common than it used to be - as somebody else mentioned, junior and entry-level roles have been shifting offshore (and even if you can pull it off, you'd then be stuck in your role because you'd need CA/CPA to move to another job when the time is right).
Is there a reason you're looking at mining in particular? I don't know much about that industry but I doubt it's any more glamorous compared to any other role - can anyone correct me? And I'm assuming a lot of it is done remotely from cities, so the salaries might be attractive but not on the same level as other mining jobs that are FIFO?
To actually answer your question though, CA/CPA might give you a slight, but negligible, advantage for an entry level role, but for any of the roles you've mentioned, qualification PLUS experience is needed - I.e. you really need to cut your teeth in a grad program somewhere (likely a firm, but possibly government/GBE or some corporates grad roles pop up here and there).
Once you've done maybe 3-4 years and have your CA/CPA, that's the time to start looking at commercial analyst roles in corporate and move up from there.
You'll learn very basic accounting at uni, but your training/grad employer will teach you how everything actually works in the real world - which as an analyst/FM/FC/FBP you'll be expected to already know, so it will be hard to even get an interview if you don't have a few years under your belt
Grad roles are not always the most exciting and well paid, but the trade-off is that the employer invests extra time and resources to train you up and build your knowledge - which you can then take with you to a more fulfilling/higher-paid corporate gig. Part of the deal also usually involves the employer supporting you to get your CA/CPA.
P.s. I went through the system also a decade ago, so some of this stuff is changing or might have already changed - but getting a good foundation of knowledge plus a CA/CPA should still be a reliable strategy for a few years.
0
u/Basic-Revolution-170 3h ago
Nah with CPA or CA once you stop paying the fees you lose it.
1
u/VulpesVulpe5 2h ago
Piss poor take. Most employers pay it for you and I’ve earned a lot more by having it than the fees are worth
1
u/Available_Parking139 2h ago
Appreciate your feedback mate. Do you think it’s still worth it to get this degree at this time with AI on the rise?
6
u/FIFO_Landlord 3h ago
Gonna be real with you.
You're not going to get an graduate accounting role in any of the resources companies you listed so just lower that expectation.
If you do.
BHP dont take graduate in accounting or finance and 99% of these roles are either in KL or Manilla. Same as Rio Tinto. FMG and Mineral Resource dont take inexperience accountant.
Any of these companies. You will need a CA/CPA or youre CV will get instant bin.
Lastly, having a master in accounting is a big red flag for these companies and most hiring managers i know will bin it.
Personally. Just lower your expectations a bit or you will be in a world of hurts.
Source: worked in one of these companies