Discover / Rankings
Find your kind of excellence.
University reputation, career strength and value.
University rankings
Univised · Value
Observed earnings and career strength per sticker cost. Lower cost is a genuine advantage; higher-priced schools need stronger outcomes. Not a lifetime ROI forecast.
| Rank | University | Value index |
|---|---|---|
| #31 | Carnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburgh · US · USD | 0.93Limited confidence Cost and outcome breakdownAnnual tuition + living: $81,297. Compared with the same eligible schools: 0.90× affordability · 1.38× earnings · 0.98× evidence-adjusted career strength. Equal weight to earnings and career strength in a geometric average, multiplied by relative affordability. Career fields: Technology, Consulting, Finance and Accounting. Career inputs use the same continuous adjustment as industry rankings, not inferred peer outcomes. The ordering also checks sensitivity to individual markets. Point estimate 1.04 · conservative Value index 0.93. These are model sensitivity checks, not statistical confidence bounds. No financial aid, taxes, loan interest or lifetime earnings are included. College Scorecard release 2025-05; cohorts vary. View market breakdownTechnology · 523 recorded search appearances. 0.84× career presence. 523 recorded appearances ÷ 619.5 expected = 0.84×. Expected counts use the same sampled schools and their estimated field cohorts. Raw field-cohort comparison 0.84× · whole-institution comparison 2.37×. Differences between these cohort definitions inform the rating's evidence adjustment. Boston0.92×12 appearances California0.27×105 appearances London2.76×12 appearances New York2.46×276 appearances Philadelphia + Dc1.81×55 appearances Texas0.89×63 appearances Sensitive to the estimated cohort definition; interpret the result with care. Raw overall presence adds observed counts across comparable markets and divides by their total expected counts. Local raw presence uses only that market. These raw ratios are preserved; headline rankings apply an additional evidence adjustment. Counts may overlap; these are historical appearances, not unique people or hiring odds. Consulting · 11 recorded search appearances. 0.95× career presence. 11 recorded appearances ÷ 11.6 expected = 0.95×. Expected counts use the same sampled schools and their estimated field cohorts. Raw field-cohort comparison 0.95× · whole-institution comparison 0.94×. Differences between these cohort definitions inform the rating's evidence adjustment. Boston0.00×0 appearances California1.55×4 appearances London5.21×1 appearances New York1.04×4 appearances Philadelphia + Dc0.72×2 appearances Texas0.00×0 appearances Raw overall presence adds observed counts across comparable markets and divides by their total expected counts. Local raw presence uses only that market. These raw ratios are preserved; headline rankings apply an additional evidence adjustment. Counts may overlap; these are historical appearances, not unique people or hiring odds. Finance and Accounting · 9 recorded search appearances. 1.87× career presence. 9 recorded appearances ÷ 4.8 expected = 1.87×. Expected counts use the same sampled schools and their estimated field cohorts. Raw field-cohort comparison 1.87× · whole-institution comparison 1.22×. Differences between these cohort definitions inform the rating's evidence adjustment. Boston3.74×1 appearances California1.02×1 appearances New York3.39×6 appearances Philadelphia + Dc0.00×0 appearances Texas1.51×1 appearances Raw overall presence adds observed counts across comparable markets and divides by their total expected counts. Local raw presence uses only that market. These raw ratios are preserved; headline rankings apply an additional evidence adjustment. Counts may overlap; these are historical appearances, not unique people or hiring odds. |