Is UCLA harder to get into than MIT?

Yes. From a general admissions standpoint, MIT is harder to get into than UCLA. MIT has a much smaller class, a highly self-selecting applicant pool, and an admissions process built around an unusually intense academic and technical profile, while UCLA is also very selective but admits a far larger and broader range of students.

The kind of student who is realistically in the MIT mix usually has exceptional strength in math and science, very high-level coursework, and evidence of building, researching, competing, or creating beyond the classroom. MIT is not just looking for strong grades. It tends to attract applicants who already stand out in advanced STEM environments, so the bar feels narrower and steeper even among top students.

UCLA is difficult in a different way. It receives an enormous volume of applications and turns away many highly qualified students, but its applicant pool is broader across majors and interests. A student can be a strong fit there through many combinations of academic performance, leadership, service, arts, or intellectual engagement, rather than needing the especially concentrated technical distinction that MIT often sees.

Another practical difference is that UCLA, as a public university, is shaped by California residency and state priorities in ways MIT is not. That does not make UCLA easy at all, but it means its selectivity operates in a different system from MIT’s highly concentrated private-school process.

So if you are asking which school is tougher to crack in a general sense, MIT is the more selective one. UCLA is still firmly in the very hard category, just with a larger class and a wider range of student profiles that can make sense for admission.