The chemical recovery of a defaced serial number is a common forensic science practice, however it is not understood how proficient experts perform in correctly identifying recovered serial numbers. Understanding the accuracy of experts and how they compare to novices in character recognition can help to establish a baseline for this expertise. In this study an expert-novice comparison assessment was completed involving 118 test plates, each stamped with six randomised alphanumeric characters. The plates were defaced and chemically recovered before being viewed by multiple participants over six time intervals. A total of 3169 character inspections were completed. An assessment of confidence and error rates were calculated for both expert (trained) and novice (untrained) participants. Errors were counted when a participant interpreted a different character to that of the ground truth and believed the result was accurate for reporting. The results showed a similar (2.3 % and 2.4 %) error rate for the cohorts, however a statistical difference in confidence levels was recorded, demonstrating the more conservative nature of experts. This study aims to assist in validating practitioner interpretations, through addressing some forensic science criticisms, such as establishing error rates to routine scientific practices. •An expert-novice comparison study was completed involving 86 participants from across Australia and New Zealand.•A total of 3169 character inspections were completed.•The results showed a consistent error rate between the two cohorts, but a statistical difference in confidence levels.•This study provides data to assist in validating examiners interpretations of chemically recovered serial numbers.