Is Brown or Columbia generally harder to get into?

Both schools receive enormous numbers of highly qualified applications and admit only a tiny share of applicants. For an individual applicant, neither is meaningfully “safer”; both belong in the highest-reach category.

One reason Columbia can appear more selective is the scale and intensity of its applicant pool. Its Manhattan location, broad international visibility, and distinctive Core Curriculum attract many students who are already competitive for the most selective private universities. That can make an already crowded applicant pool especially difficult to stand out in.

Brown is similarly selective, with a particularly strong draw for students attracted to its Open Curriculum and academically self-directed culture. Its admissions readers are looking closely for evidence that a student will use that freedom purposefully, not simply that they have strong grades and activities. A student whose record shows intellectual independence and clear academic curiosity may find Brown’s institutional fit especially compelling, but that does not make admission predictable.

Early Decision results should not be used as a simple answer to this comparison. At both institutions, early pools differ from regular-decision pools and include applicants with varying institutional connections, recruited-athlete status, and unusually strong demonstrated commitment. The practical takeaway is to apply to both only if each school’s academic structure, campus setting, and culture genuinely appeal to you, rather than trying to identify a meaningful admissions shortcut.