TIME, in partnership with Statista R, the leading global provider of market and consumer data and rankings, has published the inaugural edition of the “World’s Top Universities of 2026” ranking. The quantitative study highlights institutions that drive academic excellence globally.

Methodology

This research project conducted a comprehensive analysis to identify top-performing universities worldwide. Eligibility criteria required institutions to be older than three years, offer bachelor’s degrees, and enroll more than 2,000 students.

[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

Universities were shortlisted if they met at least one of the following conditions: 

1. At least one of the highly cited researchers, according to Clarivate, is among their faculty,
2. They are among the most renowned and frequently mentioned institutions, or
3. They applied through the open call to action published on TIME.com.

The analysis is structured around three key pillars: academic capacity & performance, innovation & economic impact, and global engagement. Institutions receive scores on each pillar, which are then aggregated into a final score used to produce the ranking.

The ranking acknowledges key limitations in global university comparisons. Given uneven reporting across countries, the Statista R team triangulated international, national, and university-supplied data to improve consistency. The study assesses many outputs relative to institutional inputs or country averages to reduce bias from differing contexts.

• Data comparability: A central challenge in global rankings is data comparability across regions and national contexts. Reporting practices often lack cohesion, even within countries. To address this, the Statista R research team employed triangulation, combining secondary data from global sources and national datasets with primary data from university reports and data submissions to verify collected information. To further reduce distortions arising from divergent reporting practices and regulations, output measures were evaluated relative to institutional inputs or to country averages. Through this approach, Statista R constructed a global ranking that assesses universities’ relevance within their respective contexts.
• Input and output: The study incorporates both input and output variables and, wherever feasible, evaluates outputs relative to inputs, considering not only absolute performance but also the resources required to achieve it. This approach aims to provide a more balanced view of the university landscape. In particular, the dimensions of academic capacity & performance and innovation & economic impact largely assess institutional impact in relation to inputs or institutional circumstances, while global engagement indicators capture universities’ international reach and positioning.

Accordingly, the study incorporates regional and national factors to contextualize academic performance and account for institutional starting positions, extending beyond purchasing power parity (PPP) to include additional relevant factors.

The framework of academic capacity & performance, innovation & economic impact, and global engagement retains the classical components used in higher education assessments, such as the learning environment and academic output, while integrating measures of societal and economic impact and the international reach of institutions.

In addition, Statista R places particular emphasis on indicators that link universities to real-world innovation, labor-market outcomes, and internationalization. These pillars are operationalized through a broad set of quantitative indicators derived from global and national datasets as well as institutional submissions, which are normalized and aggregated according to a transparent weighting scheme. The three pillars are weighted as follows in the overall scoring model: 60% academic capacity & performance, 30% innovation & economic impact, and 10% global engagement.

Scoring for Academic Capacity & Performance

Under the pillar of academic capacity & performance, the study examines both the resources universities devote to teaching and research, and the results they achieve in terms of scholarly output and academic excellence.

Within the resource and staffing coefficients, the study focuses on outputs that universities deliver for their students, relative to the resources available. These include:

• Resource expenditure per student, adjusted for regional differences and standardized using purchasing power parity (PPP). Data was collected from nationally available databases of statistical agencies and/or ministries of education for the respective countries and supplemented with official university documents, such as annual reports and financial statements.

• Research income per faculty member, adjusted for regional differences and benchmarked to the country context, capturing the funding available to generate research activity and support graduate supervision.
• Institutional income, adjusted for regional differences, reflecting the overall financial resources of the university that underpin instructional capacity, student services, and research infrastructure.
• Faculty-to-student ratio, measuring the number of students a faculty member could potentially supervise.
• Staff-to-student ratios, where applicable, capturing broader instructional and support capacity.

Data for these indicators was collected from nationally available databases and enriched with official university documents. Universities were also able to submit data through the project’s reporting form. Submissions were cross-referenced during analysis. To mitigate regional or national reporting differences, universities were benchmarked relative to their own inputs and against country-level metadata. The resulting indicators were subsequently normalized at the global level.

Much of the analysis focuses on academic performance indicators, such as publication activity and citation impact, as well as the presence of highly cited researchers. Statista R incorporated additional data sources and contextualized results at regional and national levels.

The following academic impact indicators are used:

• Clarivate’s list of highly cited researchers is used to determine the share of a university’s faculty represented among the top researchers.
• Citation counts are analyzed using the non-profit project Exaly, assessing institutional totals and indices (e.g., the h-index) from a perspective intended to reduce bias and relating results to faculty size and country context.

To capture academic distinction at the highest level, the study also considers the presence of Nobel Prize and Fields Medal laureates among university alumni and staff.

• Nobel Prize laureates were identified via the official Nobel Prize website. Their curricula vitae were examined for institutional affiliations and alma mater. Results were contextualized by country performance and faculty strength.
• Fields Medal laureates were identified via the official Fields Medal website. Their curricula vitae were examined for institutional affiliations and alma mater. Results were similarly contextualized.

Citation data was sourced from global databases; no individual citation-level research was conducted by Statista R or TIME. Laureate CVs were researched individually by Statista R’s research team.

Taken together, these indicators form a composite measure of academic capacity & performance. In the overall scoring model, this dimension contributes 60% of the final score, with indicators within the dimension weighted according to the KPI framework defined in the accompanying scoring model.

Scoring for Innovation & Economic Impact

Under the dimension of innovation & economic impact, the study examines universities’ contributions to the advancement of science and technology, the diffusion of knowledge, and their influence on economic decision-making through the careers of their graduates.

For the innovation impact on technological advancement, Statista R cooperated with LexisNexis® Intellectual Property Solutions to analyze the quantity and value of an institution’s intellectual property portfolio. The scoring is based on the Patent Asset Index featured in LexisNexis® PatentSight+. This coefficient accounts for the impact that technological and other developments under the authority of the university have on global industry.

Massive open online courses (MOOCs) extend education to broad audiences beyond geographic and, in many cases, financial constraints. Many universities offer free and paid courses on these platforms, often without entry barriers. This set of indicators therefore evaluates universities’ contributions to global knowledge dissemination and to human capacity development for innovation via open-source courses and degree programs.

In addition, to assess the diffusion and external uptake of an institution’s knowledge and services, we use the total traffic to the university’s official web domain, normalized relative to country benchmarks, capturing the institution’s digital reach of its research, innovation, and economically relevant activities among prospective students, partners, and other stakeholders.

One of the most challenging dimensions to assess is universities’ capacity to generate broad-based student outcomes beyond purely academic achievements. Outside academia, graduates influence economic decision-making and shape the societies in which we live.

Accordingly, the study examines the extent to which graduates attain positions of influence in business, thereby shaping the economy and everyday life. To do so:

• Statista R conducted an extensive analysis of publicly available curricula vitae of top executive-level employees at companies listed on major global stock exchanges.
• Researchers identified their alma maters using company disclosures and other public sources.
• The results were then contextualized by institutional size (enrollment) and by regional benchmarks to assess the output of top-performing graduates relative to university scale and regional context.

In the overall scoring model, the innovation & economic impact dimension contributes 30% of the final score, aggregating indicators related to patents, open‑education offerings, and graduate outcomes according to the KPI weights specified in the scoring model.

Scoring for Global Engagement

As a global ranking, the study evaluates the global engagement of universities by measuring the extent to which they attract international students and staff and the degree of international attention they receive.

A key indicator of internationalization is the proportion of international students enrolled at a university. Accordingly, the study examines both the share and number of international students, with particular attention to undergraduate enrollment.

• The proportion of international undergraduate students and the overall proportion of international students are used to capture the internationality of the student body.
• The proportion of international faculty is also a relevant indicator of an institution’s global character and the internationality of its teaching environment.

To assess international interest in each institution, Statista R looked at web metrics to evaluate how much traffic was on the university’s website and how much of the traffic was driven by international users. This includes both total website traffic relative to country benchmarks and the geographic distribution of visitors.

These indicators are combined into a composite measure of global engagement. In the overall scoring model, this dimension contributes 10% of the final score, based on the indicator weights set out in the KPI framework.

Final scoring

Once the data are collected and evaluated, they are consolidated and weighted within a three‑dimension scoring model. Each university’s overall score is calculated as a weighted sum of normalized indicator scores, with dimension-level weights reflecting their relative importance in the framework.

• Academic capacity & performance – 60% of the overall score
• Innovation & economic impact – 30% of the overall score
• Global engagement – 10% of the overall score

Within each dimension, multiple indicators and sub-indicators are used (e.g., resource and staffing ratios, publication and citation indices, intellectual property measures, graduate outcomes, and internationalization metrics). These indicators are normalized and combined according to the detailed weighting scheme defined in the KPI overview and scoring model.

The 500 universities with the highest final scores are featured in the “World’s Top Universities of 2026” ranking by TIME and Statista R.

Sources

The research underlying the World’s Top Universities ranking draws on multiple data streams to enable triangulation and enhance validity wherever possible. Statista R relies on primary sources, including direct data submissions from universities via the application form and officially published institutional records such as annual reports and financial statements.

In addition, the study makes extensive use of secondary sources, including global databases and national datasets from statistical agencies and relevant ministries (e.g., ministries of education). These sources help ensure within-country comparability of reported data.

The reporting form was available online from June through August 8, 2025, and was announced via TIME.com as well as through an outreach mailing by Statista R to shortlisted universities. The call was open to all institutions, ensuring equal opportunity for participation and enabling universities to provide data crucial to the analysis.

Statista R and TIME strongly encourage all universities to participate in this reporting process, with a particular appeal to institutions in countries with limited data infrastructure to submit information through this outreach. Institutions may pre-register to receive further information.

Statista R’s research team conducted extensive analyses of university websites, annual reports, and financial statements to address data gaps and cross-check information from other sources. Data was collected through a combination of manual and automated methods, followed by a manual validation process performed by expert researchers at Statista R.

See the full list.

Disclaimer:
The ranking is comprised exclusively of universities that are eligible regarding the scope described in this document. A mention in the ranking is a positive recognition based on available data sources at the time. The ranking is the result of an elaborate process which, due to the interval of data-collection and analysis, is a reflection of the last calendar years. Furthermore, events following November 28, 2025, and/or pertaining to individual persons affiliated/associated with the institutions were not included in the metrics. As such, the results of this ranking should not be used as the sole source of information for future deliberations. The information provided in this ranking should be considered in conjunction with other available information about universities or, if possible, accompanied by a visit to an institution. The quality of universities that are not included in the ranking is not disputed.