Forbes "New Ivy" List

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the Forbes article when having interviewed hiring executives in light of AI and ever changing technology

“That Ivy League-wariness persists, with 37% of respondents this year saying they are less likely to hire Ivy League grads than they were five years ago, and only 6% saying they’re more likely to do so. Those numbers are reversed for public universities, with 42% saying they’re more likely to hire these grads and just 6% less likely to do so.”

Wow Times are a changing.

I have heard this anecdotally from hiring directors in my network too. Something about an entitled attitude that they're turning off on.

For those of us with kids at both a New Ivy and a real Ivy, we know it isn’t true.

Just that the types of opportunities are different. At the Ivy you don’t see the F500 (other than tech and finance) companies much and almost no kid will show interest. You will see far more boutique firms recruiting, usually because an alum started it and they recruit heavily from their undergrad. You also have the start-up groups making many trips to the Ivy campus encouraging kids to start companies.

The New Ivy has some of the above but much smaller, but more traditional corporate employers and more regional employers. Definitely has more companies representing the group that responded to this Forbes survey.

Schools are great fits for each of the kids attending, so no complaints.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's interesting that the article is 90% about how these schools are incorporating AI into really everything throughout the curriculum.

Wasn't expecting that to be the thrust of it.

No it didn't. It just said the reality of AI is changing hiring. The quote I took away was “The most promising talents today are beginning to emerge from institutions that prioritize intellectual rigor over inherited prestige.” And - "That Ivy League-wariness persists, with 37% of respondents this year saying they are less likely to hire Ivy League grads than they were five years ago, and only 6% saying they’re more likely to do so."

Talent matters. And companies recognize that all the hooked this and that at Harvard and Princeton generally aren't great hires in 2026. Students at colleges that prioritize real talent tend to be better. I mean this is a pretty obvious observation for anyone that has been paying attention for the past five years.

I mean...yes it literally did. The first three paragraphs are about how AI is changing the jobs landscape. The next 4 paragraphs are about how the schools on the list are adapting to this new environment by incorporating AI. Then there is the 1 paragraph that you pulled from above. Then there like 8 more paragraphs again about how the schools are using AI.

So... you are correct because it's more like 95% of the article is how these schools are using AI.

BTW...that paragraph is really just utter bullshit and I have a kid at an actual Ivy and a "New Ivy" that's on the list. Both are great for these kids but my Ivy kid has so many opportunities available to them. The issue is the people responding to the Forbes survey are coming from your traditional corporate environments (think executives at Coca Cola or P&G), and it's true the Ivy kids aren't particularly interested in these jobs much anymore.

THIS. Ivy (and Chicago, Stanford, MIT) have student bodies in which 90% are chasing either MD, pHd, JD or a top job in tech or quant finance or top consulting MBB or launching a startup. They do not want traditional corporate. This is not new, it is exactly how it was at my ivy 28 years ago.
The top tech and finance companies remain fixed more than ever at targeting ivies plus about 10 other schools, 2 of which are on this "new ivy" list and do not need to be because those who know already know they have ivy-level students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's interesting that the article is 90% about how these schools are incorporating AI into really everything throughout the curriculum.

Wasn't expecting that to be the thrust of it.

No it didn't. It just said the reality of AI is changing hiring. The quote I took away was “The most promising talents today are beginning to emerge from institutions that prioritize intellectual rigor over inherited prestige.” And - "That Ivy League-wariness persists, with 37% of respondents this year saying they are less likely to hire Ivy League grads than they were five years ago, and only 6% saying they’re more likely to do so."

Talent matters. And companies recognize that all the hooked this and that at Harvard and Princeton generally aren't great hires in 2026. Students at colleges that prioritize real talent tend to be better. I mean this is a pretty obvious observation for anyone that has been paying attention for the past five years.

I mean...yes it literally did. The first three paragraphs are about how AI is changing the jobs landscape. The next 4 paragraphs are about how the schools on the list are adapting to this new environment by incorporating AI. Then there is the 1 paragraph that you pulled from above. Then there like 8 more paragraphs again about how the schools are using AI.

So... you are correct because it's more like 95% of the article is how these schools are using AI.

BTW...that paragraph is really just utter bullshit and I have a kid at an actual Ivy and a "New Ivy" that's on the list. Both are great for these kids but my Ivy kid has so many opportunities available to them. The issue is the people responding to the Forbes survey are coming from your traditional corporate environments (think executives at Coca Cola or P&G), and it's true the Ivy kids aren't particularly interested in these jobs much anymore.

THIS. Ivy (and Chicago, Stanford, MIT) have student bodies in which 90% are chasing either MD, pHd, JD or a top job in tech or quant finance or top consulting MBB or launching a startup. They do not want traditional corporate. This is not new, it is exactly how it was at my ivy 28 years ago.
The top tech and finance companies remain fixed more than ever at targeting ivies plus about 10 other schools, 2 of which are on this "new ivy" list and do not need to be because those who know already know they have ivy-level students.

The only thing ivy.plus can give that these other private schools cant is a consistent path to quant other wise they're just as good. I would take Emory for premed over most ivys.

[Anonymous]

As someone who has done a lot of recruiting for a desirable investment boutique, I find this ranking obsession to be silly. “Yes”, I like recruiting from good schools but there are plenty of them. I wouldn’t give an edge to a Cornell grad over a Colgate grad (or name +40 other schools) based on the schools. Rather, I’m going to hire the candidate who is the best fit based on so many factors. I like smart, well rounded kids (better than nerds at evaluating management teams and such) who I think will be successful. They come from lots of schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As someone who has done a lot of recruiting for a desirable investment boutique, I find this ranking obsession to be silly. “Yes”, I like recruiting from good schools but there are plenty of them. I wouldn’t give an edge to a Cornell grad over a Colgate grad (or name +40 other schools) based on the schools. Rather, I’m going to hire the candidate who is the best fit based on so many factors. I like smart, well rounded kids (better than nerds at evaluating management teams and such) who I think will be successful. They come from lots of schools.

You literally said there are basically 40 schools out of 4000. That's not plenty, just that it's more than Ivy+.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As someone who has done a lot of recruiting for a desirable investment boutique, I find this ranking obsession to be silly. “Yes”, I like recruiting from good schools but there are plenty of them. I wouldn’t give an edge to a Cornell grad over a Colgate grad (or name +40 other schools) based on the schools. Rather, I’m going to hire the candidate who is the best fit based on so many factors. I like smart, well rounded kids (better than nerds at evaluating management teams and such) who I think will be successful. They come from lots of schools.

If you are recruiting at 40 schools, your firm can't really be a "boutique" anymore.

A huge difference for the Ivy+ vs. many other schools is the sheer number of truly boutique investment, hedge fund, VC, PE, consulting, tech (not really boutique but start-ups), etc. founded by graduates and they are only hiring maybe 3 kids per year. Guess what, they just hire almost exclusively at their undergrad because they know what they are getting. But it's a lot of firms.

The volume of these types of firms really drops off once you get to even a WashU as an example.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Title should be: Ivy Rejects’ Best Alternatives

This, and you shouldn't feel disappointed going to them

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the Forbes article when having interviewed hiring executives in light of AI and ever changing technology

“That Ivy League-wariness persists, with 37% of respondents this year saying they are less likely to hire Ivy League grads than they were five years ago, and only 6% saying they’re more likely to do so. Those numbers are reversed for public universities, with 42% saying they’re more likely to hire these grads and just 6% less likely to do so.”

Wow Times are a changing.

I have heard this anecdotally from hiring directors in my network too. Something about an entitled attitude that they're turning off on.

For those of us with kids at both a New Ivy and a real Ivy, we know it isn’t true.

Just that the types of opportunities are different. At the Ivy you don’t see the F500 (other than tech and finance) companies much and almost no kid will show interest. You will see far more boutique firms recruiting, usually because an alum started it and they recruit heavily from their undergrad. You also have the start-up groups making many trips to the Ivy campus encouraging kids to start companies.

The New Ivy has some of the above but much smaller, but more traditional corporate employers and more regional employers. Definitely has more companies representing the group that responded to this Forbes survey.

Schools are great fits for each of the kids attending, so no complaints.

This is very true. I went to Emory and recruiting for Goldman was via the Atlanta office, not NYC. I would say they are also more regional for recruiting. Was at UChicago touring recently and the tour guide was a type A econ major from the Bay Area, and very impressive. She said recruiters are fawning over her and her friends, have offers as sophomores and there career advisers have serious connections and the meet with them starting July prior to Freshman year. All the kids were so helpful, polite and impressive. It was like a different world (bubble) from any other schools we toured except maybe a few Ivies. There is a difference in these schools, a very quietly kept difference. One guide said her friends fly to different countries over the weekend and go out to the city all the time, but her parents wanted her "grounded" which is why she was touring.

[Anonymous]

As with most rankings, it really depends on what the student wants to do and where they want to live. Some industries really only recruit from certain predominantly Ivy schools. Like finance. If you want finance or consulting in New York City, you are better off going to most of the Ivy schools. But if you want the same field and are willing to live elsewhere like Chicago, SF, Dallas, Seattle etc then you will have plenty of opportunities coming out of Vanderbilt, Notre Dame, Rice, Michigan, WashU, Emory etc.

But if engineering or tech, you can drop all the Ivy schools except Cornell and Princeton. You will have more opportunities going to Georgia Tech, Rice, Purdue, Carnegie Mellon, Texas, Michigan because that’s where the engineering talent is today. Going to Harvard or Yale would be a big mistake if you actually want to build things.

As for other fields, it doesn’t matter that much at this level of schools. Grad/law/med schools aren’t favoring Columbia/Brown/Dartmouth over Rice/Vandy/CMU. HYP students still gets an extra look, but as others have noted, every employer is wary of the privilege and laziness they often bring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the Forbes article when having interviewed hiring executives in light of AI and ever changing technology

“That Ivy League-wariness persists, with 37% of respondents this year saying they are less likely to hire Ivy League grads than they were five years ago, and only 6% saying they’re more likely to do so. Those numbers are reversed for public universities, with 42% saying they’re more likely to hire these grads and just 6% less likely to do so.”

Wow Times are a changing.

I have heard this anecdotally from hiring directors in my network too. Something about an entitled attitude that they're turning off on.

For those of us with kids at both a New Ivy and a real Ivy, we know it isn’t true.

Just that the types of opportunities are different. At the Ivy you don’t see the F500 (other than tech and finance) companies much and almost no kid will show interest. You will see far more boutique firms recruiting, usually because an alum started it and they recruit heavily from their undergrad. You also have the start-up groups making many trips to the Ivy campus encouraging kids to start companies.

The New Ivy has some of the above but much smaller, but more traditional corporate employers and more regional employers. Definitely has more companies representing the group that responded to this Forbes survey.

Schools are great fits for each of the kids attending, so no complaints.

This is very true. I went to Emory and recruiting for Goldman was via the Atlanta office, not NYC. I would say they are also more regional for recruiting. Was at UChicago touring recently and the tour guide was a type A econ major from the Bay Area, and very impressive. She said recruiters are fawning over her and her friends, have offers as sophomores and there career advisers have serious connections and the meet with them starting July prior to Freshman year. All the kids were so helpful, polite and impressive. It was like a different world (bubble) from any other schools we toured except maybe a few Ivies. There is a difference in these schools, a very quietly kept difference. One guide said her friends fly to different countries over the weekend and go out to the city all the time, but her parents wanted her "grounded" which is why she was touring.

Again this is wrong, as its likely outdated info or just flat out lying.
https://goizueta.emory.edu/documents/BBAEmploymentReport.pdf
46% of Emory bba grads land in the Northeast, only 30% land in the south east. 40% of the class is in finance with an avg salary of 99k, with 11k sign on bonus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As with most rankings, it really depends on what the student wants to do and where they want to live. Some industries really only recruit from certain predominantly Ivy schools. Like finance. If you want finance or consulting in New York City, you are better off going to most of the Ivy schools. But if you want the same field and are willing to live elsewhere like Chicago, SF, Dallas, Seattle etc then you will have plenty of opportunities coming out of Vanderbilt, Notre Dame, Rice, Michigan, WashU, Emory etc.

But if engineering or tech, you can drop all the Ivy schools except Cornell and Princeton. You will have more opportunities going to Georgia Tech, Rice, Purdue, Carnegie Mellon, Texas, Michigan because that’s where the engineering talent is today. Going to Harvard or Yale would be a big mistake if you actually want to build things.

As for other fields, it doesn’t matter that much at this level of schools. Grad/law/med schools aren’t favoring Columbia/Brown/Dartmouth over Rice/Vandy/CMU. HYP students still gets an extra look, but as others have noted, every employer is wary of the privilege and laziness they often bring.

This is a really simplistic way of looking at things. I guarantee you will have all the same opportunities graduating from Harvard "if you want to build things" as you will at CMU or Ga Tech.

Go look at the top Y Combinator companies below, which are companies founded by basically early 20 somethings and accepted into Y Combinator (which nearly always leads to venture funding for these companies). Harvard has 3x as many as CMU and 4x as many as Ga Tech. Rice, Purdue and Texas don't even make the list.

Top 15 Universities for YC Founders 🏆

1) 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐝 - 704
2) 𝐇𝐚𝐫𝐯𝐚𝐫𝐝 - 482
3) 𝐁𝐞𝐫𝐤𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐲 - 453
4) 𝐌𝐈𝐓 - 425
5) 𝐈𝐈𝐓 - 271
6) 𝐔𝐏𝐞𝐧𝐧 - 265
7) 𝐖𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐥𝐨𝐨 - 186
8) 𝐂𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐦𝐛𝐢𝐚 - 182
9) 𝐂𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐞𝐠𝐢𝐞 𝐌𝐞𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐧 - 160
10) 𝐂𝐨𝐫𝐧𝐞𝐥𝐥 𝐔𝐧𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐲 - 159
11) 𝐂𝐚𝐦𝐛𝐫𝐢𝐝𝐠𝐞 - 146
12) 𝐎𝐱𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐝 - 143
13) 𝐘𝐚𝐥𝐞 - 132
14) 𝐌𝐢𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐠𝐚𝐧 - 131
15) 𝐆𝐞𝐨𝐫𝐠𝐢𝐚 𝐓𝐞𝐜𝐡 - 122

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is the update 2026 list:

Private "Top Ten" new ivies (alphabetical order, not ranked):

Carnegie Mellon
Case Western
Emory
Georgetown
Northwestern
Notre Dame
Rice
Tufts
Vanderbilt
WashU St. Louis

Public "Top Ten" new ivies (alphabetical order, not ranked):

US Air Force Academy
U Florida
Georgia Tech
Michigan
UNC Chapel Hill
Purdue
UT Austin
UVA
William & Mary
U Wisconsin Madison

Air Force Academy & Case Western are NEW to the list. Which schools came off?

Where is UMD on the list?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.forbes.com/sites/aliciapark/2026/04/08/the-new-ivies-20-great-employer-friendly-colleges-embracing-ai/?utm_campaign=ForbesMainFB&utm_source=ForbesMainFacebook&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwY2xjawREvytleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETEzem9Ick9veXQ1MmltT1FSc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHtixvBpf1PvMBhl-0qlYDKxt3gjs_5wwE9x7TkABt7ErrNXE5Rbg3DYv0_Hq_aem_l2LIxXCmjZNw-2QEfY7-EA

Article about the "New Ivy" list by Forbes.com

Looks like UVA and William and Mary are on the list.

So desperate.

So sad.

[Anonymous]

New Ivys
Carnegie Mellon
Emory
Georgetown
Northwestern
Notre Dame
Rice
Vanderbilt
WashU St. Louis
Umich
Uva
Berkeley
UCLA

Plus ivy+
HYPSM
Columbia, Penn, Brown, Dartmouth, Cornell
JHU, Caltech, Duke, UChicago

and WASP are the elite schools in the country. And this is it just 30.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Title should be: Ivy Rejects’ Best Alternatives

Cute. But the article speaks to the decline of the Ivy brand in hiring. It’s almost as if you didn’t read the article?