The THE (Times Higher Education) World University Rankings 2027, released on September 30, 2026, show a mixed picture for India. While India has increased its representation from 128 institutions in 2026 to a record 143 in 2027, making it the most represented country in Asia and the second-most represented globally after the United States (168), no Indian institution has entered the global top 250. THE has ranked 2,297 universities across 118 countries and territories, making this its largest edition so far.
IISc Bengaluru remains India’s highest-ranked institution, but has slipped to joint 254th globally, from the 201–250 band in 2026. THE attributed the change partly to increasing competition as more institutions entered the ranking. Notably, the 2027 methodology awards individual ranks up to 300, compared with 200 previously, after which institutions are placed in progressively wider bands.
The 2027 table does not include IIT Bombay, IIT Delhi, IIT Madras, IIT Kanpur, IIT Kharagpur, IIT Guwahati or IIT Roorkee. These seven IITs opted out of the THE rankings in 2020, citing concerns including transparency and ranking parameters. BITS Pilani also opted out in January 2026, citing concerns over transparency, methodological rigour and verifiable benchmarking.
Among the new Indian entrants, Central University of Himachal Pradesh and Mahatma Jyotiba Phule Rohilkhand University are the highest-ranked, both placed in the 701–800 band. The participating IITs include IIT Indore (651–700), IIT Patna (701–800), IIT Gandhinagar (801–1000), IIT Mandi (801–1000) and IIT Ropar (1001–1200).
Among Indian private universities ranked in these rankings, Manav Rachna Educational Institutions (MRIIRS) Faridabad, has entered the 1201-1400 global band, up from the 1501+ band in 2026 and domestically has moved to 63rd among 170 institutions in 2027. Galgotias University, Greater Noida has moved up from the 1201-1500 band to the 1001-1200 band.
Reacting to this Dr. Prashant Bhalla, President, MRIIRS said, “This upward movement is deeply meaningful for us because it reflects progress built steadily over time. As we celebrate 30 years of Manav Rachna, our aspiration is not simply to move higher in rankings, but to build an institution whose teaching, research and innovation create lasting value. This recognition belongs to our faculty, researchers, students and every member of the Manav Rachna family who continues to raise the bar. It strengthens our resolve to keep investing in academic excellence and research that can make a meaningful difference to society.”
The increase in India’s representation therefore reflects not simply movement by existing institutions but also the entry of additional Indian universities into the global ranking framework.
Top Indian institutions in THE 2027
| Indian institution | Global rank/band |
| IISc Bengaluru | =254 |
| Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences | 326–350 |
| Shoolini University | 451–500 |
| Jamia Millia Islamia | 501–550 |
| KIIT University | 501–550 |
| Lovely Professional University | 501–550 |
| Amity University | 551–600 |
| Banaras Hindu University | 551–600 |
| Graphic Era University | 551–600 |
| Manipal Academy of Higher Education | 551–600 |
| Symbiosis International | 601–650 |
| Aligarh Muslim University | 651–700 |
| IIT Indore | 651–700 |
| Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham | 651–700 |
| Sharda University | 651–700 |
| IIT Patna | 701–800 |
| JNU | 701–800 |
| University of Delhi | 701–800 |
| IIIT Hyderabad | 701–800 |
| Panjab University | 701–800 |
| IIT Gandhinagar | 801–1000 |
| IIT Mandi | 801–1000 |
| University of Hyderabad | 801–1000 |
| IIT Ropar | 1001–1200 |
| IISER Pune | 1001–1200 |
| IIITDM Jabalpur | 1001–1200 |
Top-ranked universities globally
The global top 10 in the 2027 rankings are led by the University of Oxford, which retains the number-one position for the 11th consecutive year, followed by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Princeton University and Stanford University share third place, followed by the University of Cambridge in fifth and Harvard University in sixth.
The complete top 10 is:
- University of Oxford, UK
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), US
- Princeton University, US
- Stanford University, US
- University of Cambridge, UK
- Harvard University, US
- California Institute of Technology (Caltech), US
- Imperial College London, UK
- University of California, Berkeley, US
- Yale University, US
The US and UK continue to dominate the top 10, with seven US institutions and three from the UK. Cambridge fell to fifth from joint third last year, while Harvard slipped to sixth from joint fifth. Stanford rose to joint third from fifth. Yale moved up to joint ninth from 10th, while Berkeley retained ninth place.
Asia’s leading institution is China’s Tsinghua University, which rose to 11th, overtaking Switzerland’s ETH Zurich. Peking University is 13th and the National University of Singapore (NUS) 15th, meaning Asia has three universities in the global top 15 for the first time.
China has also broken a three-year plateau in its representation in the global top 200. The number of Chinese universities in the top 200 increased from 13 to 17, with 71% of them improving their positions.
In contrast, France’s four highest-ranked universities all fell by roughly 10 places, leaving the country with three institutions in the top 200, compared with five last year. The US, despite retaining seven of the top 10 positions, also recorded declines across several indicators, including research strength, citation impact and international students.
Across the English-speaking higher-education systems, THE notes that strong reputational performance continues to support universities despite weaker performance in several other indicators, including aspects of research quality. THE also reports a decline in UK income indicators and research strength and productivity relative to the rest of the world.
Questions over the methodology
The 2027 rankings have also revived questions about how global university rankings measure research quality.
THE’s methodology assigns 29.5% to teaching, 29% to research environment, 30% to research quality, 7.5% to international outlook and 4% to industry. Within the research environment pillar, research reputation alone accounts for 18% of the overall score, while research quality is led by citation impact, which accounts for 15%.
This produces some striking differences among Indian institutions. Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, India’s second-highest-ranked institution overall, has a 95.1 research-quality score, compared with 51.5 for IISc Bengaluru. Saveetha’s research-quality score is also higher than those reported for Cornell and Columbia in THE’s 2027 data. India Today has highlighted this disparity and questioned whether citation-based measures adequately capture wider dimensions of research quality and integrity.
The concern is not that citation indicators are inherently invalid. THE says its citation measures are field- and year-normalised, and its 2027 analysis covers 188.7 million citations to 19.9 million publications indexed through Scopus. But critics point to the possibility of statistical outliers, self-citation and coordinated citation practices affecting citation-based measures. THE’s Phil Baty has acknowledged that citation impact can be vulnerable to such effects, and THE has announced changes for the 2028 rankings, including a planned cap on institutional self-citations and a lower weight for citation impact.
Another issue concerns research retractions. THE’s published 2027 methodology does not specify an institutional penalty based on a university’s overall retraction record. India Today reports that THE has said retracted papers are already filtered out of its bibliometric analysis, while critics have argued that an institution’s broader research-integrity record should also be taken into account. This remains a methodological debate rather than evidence that the ranking itself is invalid.
The 2027 rankings therefore provide useful data on research, teaching, internationalisation and industry links, but the results need to be read in the context of participation choices, methodological weightings and the differences between reputation-based and citation-based measures. The absence of several leading IITs is particularly important when interpreting India’s position in the table.
