QS ranking profile
The University of Tokyo
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
- #36
- Down 4 places since 2025
- QS 2025 rank
- #32
- Overall score
- 85.8
Explore opportunities at The University of Tokyo
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.
#7 worldwide
#10 worldwide
#94 worldwide
#217 worldwide
#777 worldwide
#457 worldwide
#422 worldwide
#193 worldwide
#10 worldwide
#44 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
- Focused
- Teaches a limited range of faculty areas
- Research intensity
- Very high
- Very high research output in the QS classification
- Region
- Asia
- QS regional grouping
University profile
About The University of Tokyo
Editorial background written for orientation. Verify programs, funding, and admission on the university's official pages.
Research is visible at several organisational levels
The University of Tokyo separates research from graduate schools, institutes and other university organisations, university-wide research activities, and cooperation with industry. This distinction is useful because it prevents a large research landscape from being read as one simple list. Graduate schools can show the academic setting for a discipline, while institutes and other organisations may concentrate expertise around a field or shared purpose. University-wide activity can reveal connections that cross those boundaries. Begin with the level closest to your question, then use the other levels to understand the context around it rather than assuming they all describe the same work.
A topic can travel across these levels in different ways. A question about climate, health, data, materials, or society may have a disciplinary base in a graduate school and a related activity elsewhere in the university. The key is to identify where the research is anchored. Look for the people, group, or project that give the topic a defined method and object of study. A central description may be informative, yet the local research material is more likely to show whether the work involves experiments, computation, theory, archives, field data, design, or another approach relevant to your own preparation.
Use university-wide activity without overgeneralising it
UTokyo's public research pages also make room for cooperation with outside organisations and for research news from across the university. These pages can help identify active areas and the language used to describe them. They should be treated as navigation, not as proof of a stable research route for every related subject. News often highlights a particular result, while a university-wide initiative can cover a broader aim than the work of any one laboratory. Follow each promising lead to the academic unit, institute, or researcher that explains the question and methods more fully.
This approach is useful when a question spans more than one discipline. Instead of collecting every page with a matching keyword, create a small chain of evidence. Start with the main problem, identify the academic home, then add the local work that explains the technique or conceptual approach. Use wider initiatives only to clarify how the work connects with a larger setting. If the chain cannot be completed with current material, leave the connection open. A well-marked uncertainty is more useful than a polished statement that combines unrelated parts of a large university.
Build a University of Tokyo research note
A focused University of Tokyo note should name the question first and the institution second. Choose one graduate school, institute, other organisation, or university-wide activity that appears relevant, then identify the people or group closest to the subject. Explain the fit through a concrete link: a shared dataset, a scientific system, a research method, a technical challenge, or a theoretical problem. If a connection arises only because a central page names a broad theme, it needs more local evidence before it can carry much weight in a comparison.
Keep institutional context and personal research direction separate. The central university pages are valuable for showing the range of research activity and the relationship between organisational levels. They cannot reveal every detail about a particular research environment. Record the material that is current, the point that requires a fresh check, and the reason one unit seems more relevant than another. This process makes it easier to compare several possible settings fairly and to revise your view as departments, institutes, and research groups update their public information.