Is Harvard or Princeton generally considered more selective for undergraduate admission?

The practical distinction is not a reliable difference in admission difficulty: both Harvard and Princeton should be treated as equally high-uncertainty reaches, while the more useful comparison is which academic setting and campus culture suit you.

A single acceptance rate cannot settle the question because the two schools receive different mixes of applicants. Their applicant pools also include institutional-priority groups, such as recruited athletes and applicants with distinctive talents or circumstances, so the published overall rate does not describe any one student’s odds. Small year-to-year shifts in application volume or enrollment planning can also make one school’s rate look lower without establishing that it is consistently harder to enter.

In broad public perception, Harvard is often described as the more famous and more heavily applied-to name, which can create the impression that it is more selective. Princeton is not meaningfully easier, however; its smaller undergraduate-focused environment and limited class size make admission comparably difficult. At this level, differences in fit, course preparation, recommendations, activities, and the particular needs of each entering class matter much more than a perceived hierarchy between the two.

Neither Harvard nor Princeton can responsibly be called clearly more selective in a way that should affect your application strategy. Apply to either because you can make a specific, credible case for why that institution fits your goals, and regard an admission outcome at either one as highly unpredictable.