Explained: Why Indian HEIs such as IITs Fell in QS Asia 2026 Despite Rise in QS Global
In the latest QS Asia Rankings for 2026, several top-tier Indian institutions, particularly the prestigious Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs), experienced significant declines in their rankings. This phenomenon is particularly striking given that some of these institutions improved their positions in the QS Global Rankings for the same year. This article delves into the reasons behind this anomaly and explores potential solutions for enhancing India’s standing in global higher education rankings.
Overview of QS Asia 2026 Rankings
The 2026 edition of the QS Asia rankings evaluated 1,526 higher education institutions across Asia, with 557 new entries. Among these, 260 institutions were from China and 137 from India. Mainland China dominated the rankings, featuring 394 institutions, three of which are in the top 10 and 25 in the top 100. In contrast, India had 294 universities represented, with only seven making it to the top 100. Notably, 110 Indian institutions dropped by over 10 ranks, while 33 improved by at least 10 ranks.
Performance of Indian Universities in QS Asia 2026
Among the top 10 ranked Indian institutions in the QS Asia 2026 rankings, nine are premier institutions, including seven IITs, the Indian Institute of Science (IISc), and the University of Delhi. A private institution, Chandigarh University, made its debut in the top 10, moving up by 11 ranks and displacing Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU). Despite their overall average score increasing from 65.1 in 2025 to 71.7 in 2026, all nine public institutions saw a decline in their rankings.
Key Factors Influencing Rankings
- Faculty-Student Ratio: The faculty-student ratio for Indian institutions was relatively lower compared to their competitors.
- Citations per Paper: While the number of research papers produced by Indian institutions was higher than those of the top 10 in Asia, the citations per paper were significantly lower, indicating a disparity in the quality of research.
- Internationalization: Private institutions in India performed better in internationalization indicators, surpassing public institutions by a considerable margin.
Regional Competition and Changing Geography of Excellence
In recent years, Chinese universities have made substantial investments in international faculty recruitment, research capacity, and industry partnerships. These initiatives have led to notable gains in the 2026 rankings, pushing many Asian peers down the list, even if those peers have improved their absolute metrics. The increased participation of high-performing institutions in the rankings has shifted average scores upward, meaning that even small differences in scores can have a significant impact on relative rankings.
How China and Hong Kong Outperformed India
China’s national initiatives, such as the Double First Class University Plan, have spurred rapid growth in high-impact research output. Moreover, intensified internationalization efforts have increased global scholar and faculty mobility. To attract more international students, China has introduced a new STEM visa, facilitating the admission of students in science, technology, engineering, or medicine fields into its top institutions. Additionally, more accessible postgraduate work visas aim to retain talented students.
Indian Institutions in QS Global vs. QS Asia Rankings
It may seem paradoxical that while some IITs improved their ranks in the QS Global 2026, their positions fell in the QS Asia rankings during the same year. For example, IIT Delhi advanced from 150 to 123 in the global ranking but dropped from 44 to 59 in the Asia rankings. Similarly, IIT Madras improved from 227 to 180 globally but fell from 56 to 70 in Asia.
The QS Asia rankings introduced new indicators compared to the World University Rankings, including metrics such as staff with a Ph.D. and student exchange programs. The replacement of citations per faculty with papers per faculty and citations per paper, along with increased weightage for international research networks and employer reputation, has also influenced the rankings. Institutions that surpassed IITs in the QS Asia rankings have excelled in these specific metrics, reflecting a shift in priorities that may favor Chinese institutions.
Conclusion
The decline of Indian institutions in the QS Asia rankings, despite improvements in global standings, highlights the complex dynamics of higher education evaluation. To enhance their competitiveness, Indian universities must focus on improving quality metrics, internationalization, and strategic partnerships. Addressing these areas will be crucial for regaining lost ground in regional rankings and ensuring a robust presence in the global higher education landscape.
Note: This article is based on data and insights available as of November 2025.
