Is the JLPT Getting Harder, or Are Test Takers Just Not Trying Hard Enough? — Part 2: The July JLPT Mystery

July or December? Which Japanese-Language Proficiency Test examination produces better results, and why? After examining twelve July sessions and comparing them with our thirteen years of December statistics, I've uncovered a pattern that raises more questions than I originally expected.

Introduction: And You Thought December Was Interesting?

Alright, Gaijin Gentlemen and Ladies, welcome back to our investigation into the Japanese-Language Proficiency Test! In Part 1, we examined thirteen years of December JLPT statistics, covering 2013 through 2025. We discovered declining certification rates, some rather embarrassing-looking differences between Japan and overseas testing locations, and an extraordinary jump in passing rates during the COVID-19 pandemic.

But we were only looking at half the picture. The JLPT is generally administered twice a year, in July and December, although availability depends on the testing location. When I originally wrote this series around 2020, I deliberately excluded the July results because I wanted to keep the comparison consistent. I promised to revisit them eventually, and it looks like that day has finally arrived.

I've now examined the July results from 2013 through 2025, excluding 2020 because the examination was canceled worldwide. That gives us twelve July sessions to compare against the corresponding December examinations. And after looking through the numbers, I discovered something that deserves an article of its own.

July examinees usually have higher certification rates than December examinees.

Not occasionally. Not just during the pandemic. In eleven of the twelve comparable years, the worldwide July certification rate exceeded December's.

So what the hell is going on here?

July vs. December: The Numbers Don't Match

Let's begin with the overall certification rates. To make the comparison meaningful, I've paired each July examination with the December examination from the same calendar year. That gives us twelve years of comparable results between 2013 and 2025, with 2020 excluded. I'm not treating the pandemic cancellation as a zero-percent passing rate, because an examination that never took place cannot have a certification rate.

Here's what the statistics reveal.

Year	July	December
2013	41.3%	41.8%
2014	41.9%	37.0%
2015	39.6%	36.6%
2016	40.5%	36.4%
2017	40.1%	36.4%
2018	37.6%	35.1%
2019	36.1%	34.0%
2021	45.1%	42.5%
2022	40.4%	38.2%
2023	41.7%	35.5%
2024	39.6%	35.0%
2025	36.3%	33.9%

Take a good look at that table.

The only year in which December outperformed July was 2013, when December achieved 41.8% compared with July's 41.3%. Every other comparable year favored July, sometimes by a considerable margin. In 2023, for example, July recorded 41.7% while December managed just 35.5%, a difference of 6.2 percentage points.

That is a remarkably consistent pattern.

But before anyone starts booking a July examination because they think it'll be easier, we need to understand what we're actually comparing. A higher percentage of successful examinees doesn't automatically mean the questions were easier. It might mean that different people took the examination, that their preparation differed, or that other circumstances influenced the results.

And that's where this investigation gets interesting.

More Than Five Million July Examinees

Let's step away from individual years and examine the complete July dataset. Across the twelve July examinations between 2013 and 2025, the official statistics recorded 5,341,924 examinees. Of those, 2,110,879 received certification, producing a combined certification rate of approximately 39.5%. These are examination-session records rather than unique individuals, since the same student may have taken multiple tests.

Now compare that with the corresponding December sessions. Excluding December 2020 to keep the year sets aligned, the December examinations recorded 6,152,141 examinees and 2,227,263 certifications. Their combined certification rate was approximately 36.2%. In other words, July had an advantage of roughly 3.3 percentage points across the matched examination years.

That might not sound enormous at first. However, when we're discussing millions of examination records, even a few percentage points represent a substantial difference in outcomes. More importantly, the advantage appears repeatedly rather than being confined to a single unusual year. That suggests there's something worth investigating beyond random annual fluctuations.

Still, we haven't established why it happens.

Why Are July Certification Rates Higher?

This is the question I would love to answer definitively. Are the July examinations easier? Do candidates prepare more effectively during the first half of the year? Or does the examination attract a different population of students depending on when it's administered?

My first instinct is to examine who takes the test. The JLPT is not offered twice a year in every overseas location, and the availability of examination sessions can influence which candidates register. Academic calendars, work obligations, and registration schedules may also affect participation. Consequently, the July and December groups are not necessarily interchangeable populations.

This is an important statistical problem. If the two groups contain different proportions of students at different levels, their overall certification rates may differ even when the proficiency standards remain unchanged. We might also find differences in students' previous examination experience, preparation methods, or motivations. Unfortunately, the certification tables don't provide enough information to isolate those factors.

So the honest answer is that we don't know why July usually performs better.

But that doesn't mean we can't investigate the pattern more closely.

The Japan vs. Overseas Mystery Returns

In Part 1, one of my biggest complaints concerned the lower certification rates among people taking the JLPT in Japan. I originally assumed living in Japan should provide an enormous advantage. After all, Japanese is all around you, and opportunities to encounter the language are practically endless. Yet the December statistics consistently showed higher overall certification rates overseas.

So does July tell the same story? Yes, although the differences are somewhat smaller when we combine the results. Across the twelve July sessions, Japan recorded 1,959,389 examinees and 703,521 certifications, producing an aggregate certification rate of approximately 35.9%. Overseas locations recorded 3,382,535 examinees and 1,407,358 certifications, for an aggregate rate of approximately 41.6%. That's a difference of about 5.7 percentage points in favor of overseas candidates.

The overseas advantage therefore appears in both examination sessions, but its size varies. That should make us cautious about assigning one simple explanation to the difference. It's possible that changes in candidate populations and examination-level selection account for at least part of the pattern.

But something else caught my attention. At certain JLPT levels, the difference between Japan and overseas results nearly disappears in one examination session, only to become substantial again in another. And one of the clearest examples appears in the 2025 N3 results.

JLPT N3: Now This Is Interesting!

Of all the comparisons I've examined, the 2025 JLPT N3 results are among my

favorites. In July 2025, candidates in Japan achieved an N3 certification rate of 37.9%. Overseas candidates achieved 38.1%, meaning the difference between the groups was only 0.2 percentage points. For practical purposes, the reported rates were almost identical.

Now let's jump ahead six months. In December 2025, the N3 certification rate in Japan fell to 26.2%. Overseas, the rate was 37.5%. Suddenly, the difference had widened to 11.3 percentage points.

What the hell happened? Here's another way of looking at the results.

N3 examination	Japan	Overseas	Worldwide
July 2025	37.9%	38.1%	38.0%
December 2025	26.2%	37.5%	31.2%

The overseas results were relatively similar between the two sessions, while the certification rate in Japan changed substantially. That's particularly interesting because it demonstrates how different the results can look within a single calendar year. Anyone examining only December 2025 might come away with a very different impression than someone examining July.

But there's a major limitation. These aren't necessarily the same examinees, and the tables don't tell us whether the July or December N3 questions were intrinsically more difficult. We also don't know how the candidates' backgrounds, preparation, or reasons for registering differed. The figures show a large change in results, but not its cause.

Still, this is exactly why I wanted to examine July separately. It challenges the assumptions I made when I originally investigated the December statistics.

What About N1, the Most Advanced JLPT Level?

Now let's turn our attention to the big one. JLPT N1 is the highest examination level, and passing it is a major achievement for many Japanese learners. The reading passages and listening tasks demand substantial proficiency, while the examination's time constraints can create additional challenges. It's certainly not something I'd recommend attempting without serious preparation.

But does July produce a better result at N1? Interestingly, the answer isn't always yes.

In July 2025, the worldwide N1 certification rate was 28.0%, compared with 29.8% in December. That means December actually had the higher N1 certification rate that year, even though July performed better overall across all five levels.

And the location-specific figures are revealing. In July 2025, Japan recorded 24.9% at N1, compared with 30.1% overseas. In December, Japan recorded 24.0%, while overseas locations achieved 34.2%. The overseas advantage existed in both sessions, but it was substantially larger in December.

This complicates the overall July-versus-December story. An examination session can have a higher combined certification rate without producing higher results at every level. That's why we need to distinguish the worldwide total from the individual N1 through N5 outcomes. Otherwise, we risk drawing conclusions that disappear when we examine the underlying figures.

So no, I wouldn't claim July is the better choice for everyone. The answer depends on far more than the month printed on your registration confirmation.

The Weeaboo Killer Test Strikes Again!

And now, ladies and gentlemen, we arrive at an old friend. JLPT N5. Or, as I enjoy calling it, the “Weeaboo Killer Test.”

I've used that nickname for years because N5 can expose the difference between enjoying Japanese pop culture and actually understanding elementary Japanese. Someone might recognize dozens of expressions from anime while struggling to read a simple sentence written in hiragana and kanji. There's nothing wrong with discovering Japanese through entertainment, but enthusiasm alone won't satisfy the examination requirements.

Now let's examine the July 2025 results. In Japan, N5 candidates achieved a certification rate of 57.8%. Overseas candidates achieved 50.3%, producing a worldwide rate of 50.8%. That means Japan outperformed overseas at N5, reversing the pattern observed at several higher levels.

And what happened in December? Japan achieved 53.5%, compared with 50.0% overseas. Once again, Japan had the advantage, although the difference was smaller. The worldwide certification rate was 50.2%, remarkably close to the July result.

So N5 behaved differently from N3. The introductory examination showed relatively similar worldwide certification rates in the two sessions, while N3 produced a considerably larger difference. Once again, this reinforces the importance of examining each proficiency level separately rather than treating the JLPT as one uniform examination.

But please, don't mistake those results for proof that N5 students are more dedicated in Japan. The candidate populations differ, and the available statistics don't establish why the certification rates vary. All we can say is that N5 continues to produce an interesting contrast with the higher levels. And yes, I still think the nickname is funny.

COVID-19 and the Missing July Examination

There's one particularly important event we need to address before drawing conclusions. July 2020. Or rather, the examination that never happened.

The July 2020 JLPT was canceled worldwide because of the COVID-19 pandemic. This affected examinees in Japan and overseas, leaving students unable to take the examination during the normal summer session. Consequently, there is no July 2020 certification rate to include in our historical comparison.

That's not a minor detail. In Part 1, we discovered that December 2020 produced an unusually high worldwide certification rate of 51.4%. The December 2019 rate had been just 34.0%, making the pandemic-era increase particularly dramatic. But comparing December 2020 with an imaginary July result would be meaningless.

The following year also produced some unusual results. In July 2021, the worldwide certification rate was 45.1%, compared with 42.5% in December. Overseas candidates achieved 53.6% in July and 53.9% in December, while Japan recorded 38.8% and 31.2%, respectively. Those are substantial differences between the examination populations.

So did the pandemic produce better Japanese students? That's not something the statistics establish. Restrictions, cancellations, changes in examination access, and differences in candidate populations all complicate the picture. We can identify that certification rates changed substantially during the pandemic years, but we cannot determine from these tables alone whether those changes resulted from preparation, examination difficulty, or participation effects.

The sensible approach is to treat those years separately. Otherwise, we risk building an entire argument around circumstances that were anything but normal.

The Post-Pandemic Results: Are Things Returning to Normal?

By 2023, JLPT participation had begun recovering substantially. The July 2023 examination recorded 602,140 examinees worldwide, followed by 680,453 in July 2024. By July 2025, participation reached 769,229 examinees. That's an extraordinary increase compared with the early years of this investigation.

But something else happened. The worldwide July certification rate declined from 41.7% in 2023 to 39.6% in 2024 and 36.3% in 2025. December certification rates were also comparatively low, recording 35.5%, 35.0%, and 33.9% in those same years. As participation expanded, both examination sessions returned to rates well below the unusual pandemic-era highs.

Does that mean students are getting worse at Japanese? Not necessarily. The examination is attracting a much larger population, and the composition of that population may have changed. Students may also be registering for different levels, pursuing different educational or employment goals, and preparing under different circumstances. Without detailed information about those changes, the certification rate alone cannot tell us whether the average candidate's Japanese ability has declined.

What we can say is that July's advantage persisted. Even after the pandemic, July produced a higher worldwide certification rate than December in 2023, 2024, and 2025. That makes the seasonal difference worth investigating further. However, the results still don't prove that one examination session is easier.

And that brings us back to the question that started this entire series.

Is the JLPT Getting Harder?

After reviewing both July and December statistics, I'm even less convinced that certification rates alone can establish whether the JLPT has become harder.

We've seen rates decline, increase, and decline again. We've seen overseas candidates outperform candidates in Japan, only for the size of that advantage to change dramatically depending on the year and examination level. We've also seen July produce higher overall certification rates in almost every comparable year, while individual levels sometimes show the opposite result.

That's not the kind of pattern I'd expect from one simple explanation. The JLPT uses scaled scoring, and the published certification percentages are influenced by which candidates take the examination. A change in passing rates could reflect differences in candidate proficiency, examination participation, preparation, or several other factors. To measure changes in examination difficulty directly, we'd need more detailed evidence than these summary statistics provide.

So can I prove that July is easier? No.

Can I prove that December is harder? Also no.

What I can demonstrate is that certification outcomes differ between the sessions and that those differences are remarkably consistent at the worldwide aggregate level. That's an important observation, even without a definitive explanation. It should encourage further investigation rather than speculation presented as fact. But what about the accusation that students aren't trying hard enough?

Are JLPT Students Actually Underprepared?

Here's where I want to revisit something I said in the original article. When I first examined the JLPT statistics, I was tempted to blame poor results on students who weren't studying seriously. I assumed that people living in Japan should perform better and that low certification rates reflected a failure to take advantage of their surroundings. In hindsight, those conclusions went beyond what the data could establish.

I still believe some students underestimate the JLPT. I've encountered learners who assume that watching anime or living in Japan automatically gives them the abilities needed for N2 or N1. I've also seen how a structured study schedule can help students identify weaknesses in grammar, reading, vocabulary, and listening. Preparation matters, and there's nothing wrong with telling students that they need to take examinations seriously.

But the statistics don't measure effort. Someone can study diligently and still fail because they selected an examination above their current proficiency. Another candidate might be balancing employment, university, and family responsibilities while preparing with limited resources. Others may simply need more time to develop the skills required for certification.

Those possibilities deserve consideration. We should also remember that students taking the JLPT may have very different goals. Some need certification for educational or professional opportunities, while others take the examination to assess their progress. Not every unsuccessful candidate is someone who expected an easy victory.

So yes, students should prepare seriously. But no, we cannot label millions of examinees lazy because a certification percentage disappoints us.

Should You Take the JLPT in July or December?

Now for some advice that readers can actually use. If you have a choice between July and December, I wouldn't select your examination date solely because July has historically produced a higher certification rate. Those statistics describe groups of candidates, not your individual probability of passing. Your preparation, proficiency, and examination level matter far more than a historical average.

Instead, consider how much time you need to prepare. If you're comfortable with the examination material and regularly performing well on appropriate practice questions, July may be a reasonable target. If you're still struggling with foundational grammar or reading comprehension, waiting until December could give you additional preparation time. Choosing the later session isn't a failure if it improves your readiness.

You should also consider where the examination is offered. Some overseas testing locations administer the JLPT only once a year, so your preferred month may not be available. Registration schedules, travel requirements, and local testing capacity can also affect your decision. Check the official JLPT website and your local testing institution before making plans.

And don't forget the sectional requirements. A student who performs well overall can still fail by scoring below the minimum in a required section. That makes balanced preparation especially important. If your listening comprehension is considerably weaker than your reading, don't assume your reading score will automatically save you.

Ultimately, the best examination date is the one that gives you a realistic opportunity to demonstrate your abilities. Not the one with the prettiest historical passing percentage.

What Have We Actually Learned From Both Investigations?

After examining the December results in Part 1 and the July results here in Part 2, I think we've established several useful findings.

1. First, the JLPT has grown enormously since 2013, attracting hundreds of thousands of examinees during each recent administration.

2. Second, worldwide certification rates have fluctuated considerably, especially during the COVID-19 disruption.

3. Third, overseas testing locations frequently produce higher aggregate certification rates than Japan.

4. And fourth, July usually produces higher worldwide certification rates than December.
   

That's an interesting collection of facts, but none of them independently establishes that the JLPT has become harder or that students have become less dedicated. The statistics tell us what happened, not necessarily why it happened. Those explanations require additional research into the candidates, their preparation, and the examination itself.

I also think we've identified a promising direction for future investigation. The differences between N1, N2, N3, N4, and N5 deserve attention because each level attracts candidates with potentially different backgrounds and motivations. The N3 results in 2025 are especially intriguing, as are the recurring differences between Japan and overseas locations. There's plenty of material here for researchers interested in Japanese-language education.

But for this series, I think we've reached an appropriate conclusion. And it's not quite the conclusion I expected when I originally started looking through the statistics.

Final Verdict: Maybe We've Been Asking the Wrong Question

So, after examining thirteen years of December examinations and twelve July sessions, what is my answer?

Is the JLPT getting harder, or are test takers simply not trying hard enough?

Neither explanation has been established by the available certification data.

We know that July has historically produced higher worldwide certification rates in most comparable years. We know that candidates taking the JLPT overseas frequently outperform candidates in Japan at the aggregate level. And we know that extraordinary circumstances, including the COVID-19 pandemic, coincided with some dramatic changes in examination outcomes.

But we cannot confidently explain those changes by pointing to question difficulty or student motivation alone. What I've learned from this investigation is that examination results require more careful interpretation than I originally appreciated. My younger self was quick to criticize candidates who didn't pass, particularly those living in Japan. Looking at the expanded dataset, I now think the differences between examination populations deserve considerably more attention.

That doesn't mean I've abandoned my belief in disciplined study. Quite the opposite. If you're preparing for the JLPT, take your studies seriously, select an appropriate level, and develop the vocabulary, grammar, reading, and listening skills needed for success. Don't assume that living in Japan, watching anime, or memorizing isolated expressions will automatically carry you through the examination.

But if you fail, don't assume you're incapable of learning Japanese. Review your results, identify your weaknesses, and adjust your preparation. Language proficiency develops through sustained effort, and a single examination result doesn't define your entire ability. What matters is whether you use the experience to make progress.

As for the JLPT itself? I think it remains a valuable examination, but its certification statistics tell us only part of the story. If we want to understand why candidates succeed or fail, we need to look beyond passing percentages. That means examining the people taking the test, the circumstances surrounding their preparation, and the abilities being measured.

And that's where I'll leave this investigation. Thirteen years of statistics, millions of examination records, and one hell of a rabbit hole later, I have a much better appreciation for what these numbers can—and cannot—tell us.

Until next time, Gaijin Gentlemen and Ladies. Keep studying, keep improving, and don't let one disappointing examination result convince you to give up.

頑張れ！

Editor's Note — November 2026: This article concludes Simple Gaijin's two-part investigation of JLPT certification statistics from 2013 through 2025. The July analysis includes twelve examination sessions; July 2020 was canceled worldwide. Figures were compiled from official JLPT historical results, with combined certification rates calculated from examinee and certified-candidate totals. The analysis identifies patterns in examination outcomes but does not establish causal explanations for differences in question difficulty, preparation, motivation, or candidate characteristics.