Why do countries with much smaller institutional portfolio such as Singapore or Japan always punch much above their weight in global university ranking? For years, National University of Singapore (NUS) at 8th, and Nanyang Technological University (NTU) have continued to be among top 15 universities of the world.
Unlike India, China and Japan do not even have English as medium, still a very high number of international students line up to enrol in their universities which have maintained their place among the top 50.
QS World University Rankings 2025 edition is out. For the first time, 54 Indian universities have secured places in the global table, up from just 11 a decade ago, making India the fourth most represented nation behind the United States (192 institutions), the United Kingdom (90) and Mainland China (72).
On the forefront is IITD, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, which moved up to 123rd from its 150th position last year. Close on its heels, IITM, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, surged 47 places from 227 to 180, underscoring the growing research prowess of India’s premier institute.
Twelve IITs feature in this year’s list, alongside a mix of central universities, deemed-to-be institutions and new private entrants. Eight of these universities are first-timers, the highest number from any country in this cycle, reflecting India’s expanding academic ecosystem.
With 46 institutions in the global table, India ranks as the seventh most represented nation worldwide and the third in Asia, trailing only China (71) and Japan (49) in South Asia. Yet, it also underscores a gap in concentrated excellence. While China and Japan regularly penetrate the global top 50, India’s strongest performers cluster remains much down the list. Leading lights like IIT Delhi (123) and IIT Madras (180) remain outside the top 100, even as they represent significant strides in the fields such as quantum computing and AI.
At the summit of Asia’s academic pyramid, China’s elite universities continue to set the pace. Peking University leads the charge at 14th globally, with Tsinghua University close behind at 20th, followed by Fudan (39th), Shanghai Jiao Tong (45th) and Zhejiang (47th). Japan’s top tier is anchored by the University of Tokyo at 32nd, a comprehensive powerhouse famed for its rigorous general education foundations, while Kyoto University secures a spot in the global top 50 at 50th, buoyed by exceptional scores in Academic Reputation (19th) and Employer Reputation (22nd).
Notably, six Indian institutions now sit within the global top 250, and five rank among the world’s top 100 for Employer Reputation, signalling strong industry confidence in Indian graduates.
Yet, beneath these headline gains, the rankings reveal areas where India must deepen its efforts. Despite a respectable average score of 43.7 in Citations per Faculty – surpassing nations such as Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States – only eight Indian universities break into the top 100 on this indicator. Given that research and discovery account for half of an institution’s overall score, bolstering high impact publications remains crucial if India is to challenge perennial front‑runners on the world stage.
Internationalisation too represents a pressing frontier. While India has made strides in attracting students and forging global partnerships, the newly introduced International Student Diversity metric – designed to capture both the scale and variety of overseas enrolments – carries zero weight this cycle, and Indian institutions collectively lag on the International Faculty Ratio (5% of total score) and International Student Ratio (5%). To transform from regional powerhouse to global hub, universities will need to accelerate faculty exchanges, curriculum collaborations and recruitment from a broader talent pool.
India languishes on internationalisation, scoring just 2.9 for its International Student Ratio (global average 26.5) and 9.3 for its International Faculty Ratio (global average 28.1), while its Faculty/Student Ratio of 16.2 trails the world’s 28.1 benchmark.
In Singapore’s case, the story is one of targeted excellence. NUS’s eighth place overall standing places it among the top 0.5 percent of the world’s universities, and it claims top‑50 status in five individual indicators – Academic Reputation (15th), Employer Outcomes (6th) and Sustainability (26th) among them. NTU, for its part, has climbed steadily on the strength of strategic research investments and innovative teaching models, breaking into the global top 12 in the subsequent 2026 edition and underscoring Singapore’s emphasis on research-intensive, interdisciplinary priorities. Such standout performances, against the backdrop of a very small national portfolio, speak to Singapore’s ability to concentrate resources on a handful of world class institutions.
India could emulate Singapore’s sharp focus on channelling investment into flagship universities to elevate their global profiles, expanding strategic partnerships, deepening industry linkages and replicating Singapore’s interdisciplinary campus planning. The Singaporean approach to robust international recruitment and quasi‑Oxbridge pedagogy has fostered enviable academic reputations.
Internationalisation is another area where India lags. It registers far lower ratios of international students and faculty, reflecting both visa policy barriers and a very naïve global branding of its campuses
Chinese universities boast sizeable international cohorts – Tsinghua’s 4,017 overseas students amount to over 10 percent of its enrolment – while concerted recruitment and English‑taught pathways have become priorities in Beijing’s global strategy .
Japan, traditionally more insular, has made incremental strides: the University of Tokyo alone hosts some 2,100 foreign students, enabled by fully English mediated degree programmes and targeted scholarship schemes. Japan leverages deep industry‑academia linkages and robust postgraduate programmes to maintain steady research quality, often punching above its weight despite a smaller institutional base.
