QS ranking profile
University of Victoria
This page presents clearly labeled QS ranking data for orientation. It does not verify programs, supervisors, funding, admission requirements, or the university's website.
- QS 2026 rank
- #358
- Down 9 places since 2025
- QS 2025 rank
- #349
- Overall score
- 41.1
Explore opportunities at University of Victoria
Browse active research positions, doctoral fellowships, and university funding calls indexed from official faculties and verified sources.
QS indicators
Reported ranking indicators
Each indicator is scored out of 100 in the same QS snapshot as the summary above.
#495 worldwide
#701 worldwide
#801 worldwide
#163 worldwide
#149 worldwide
#440 worldwide
#406 worldwide
#673 worldwide
#703 worldwide
#172 worldwide
Institution profile
How QS classifies this institution
QS groups institutions by size, subject range, and research output.
- Size
- Large
- About 12,000 to 30,000 students
- Subject range
- Comprehensive
- Teaches across all main faculty areas
- Research intensity
- Very high
- Very high research output in the QS classification
- Region
- Americas
- QS regional grouping
University profile
About University of Victoria
Editorial background written for orientation. Verify programs, funding, and admission on the university's official pages.
Victoria's impact areas give a structured way to explore research
University of Victoria presents five overlapping research impact areas: climate, environmental change and sustainability; health and wellness; Indigenous-led inquiry; social justice and equity; and technology and the human experience. This is a useful map for questions that cross an ordinary department boundary. The areas overlap by design, so a reader should not assume that one label identifies a single method or unit. A climate question might draw on environmental science, data, governance, or another perspective. The next step is to find the researcher, centre, or cluster that states how the question is being approached.
The research page describes work with governments, industry, community groups, scholars, artists, and partners around the world. This helps clarify the public and collaborative dimensions of some research questions. It does not show the scope of every group. When a partnership or impact area looks relevant, find the local material that names the research object and the form of collaboration. This keeps the comparison grounded in what a particular research setting communicates rather than in a broad institutional statement.
Researcher search, centres, and clusters answer different needs
UVic makes a researcher search, research centres and clusters, and partnership information visible from its research pages. A researcher profile can show a focused intellectual direction, while a centre or cluster can show a shared setting for related work. The two forms of evidence should be read together but not collapsed. A centre may cover a large issue and include several methods; a researcher may work on one narrow aspect of it. Use the local page that is closest to the question as the main evidence, then use the larger structure to understand possible connections across fields.
The page also connects research with a strategy that sets out aspirations, actions, outcomes, and impact areas. Strategy language can be useful background for understanding why certain themes are visible. It does not replace evidence of current work. If a subject looks promising, follow the trail toward research news, a centre, a researcher, or a project. Write down what that local evidence establishes and what it leaves unclear. This approach avoids turning an institutional aim into a conclusion about a particular research environment.
Develop a University of Victoria comparison from the research object
A careful University of Victoria note begins with the research object rather than an impact-area label. It may concern an ecosystem, health condition, social process, technology, or cultural question. Use the relevant impact area to locate possible researchers or clusters, then look for the page that shows how the object is studied. The key evidence might be a method, a data source, a field setting, a design process, or a theoretical approach. Once these elements are visible, the connection can be explained in a precise sentence without claiming more than the source supports.
End with a distinction between the central map and the local setting. The impact areas show how the university publicly organises several important directions. The local group or researcher shows whether a particular question has a real academic home. Record both, but give the latter priority when comparing options. This creates a profile that remains useful when the central themes stay stable but the specific projects, people, and research descriptions evolve.