Tufts vs Richmond for economics: which is stronger for an undergrad economics major?

For undergraduate economics, Tufts has the stronger overall edge if you want a larger academic ecosystem, more course variety, and broader name recognition in economics-adjacent fields. Its economics department is well established, the university has a stronger research profile overall, and being near Boston creates unusually good access to internships, policy organizations, consulting, and finance-related opportunities during the school year.

Tufts tends to fit the student who wants economics in a more quantitative, policy-aware, and outward-facing setting. You are more likely to find a wider spread of electives, more overlap with international relations, political science, math, and data-focused work, and more chances to connect classwork to the Boston-area economy. That matters because for econ, preparation is not just the major itself. It is also access to research, faculty projects, internships, and peers headed into similar fields.

Richmond makes the most sense for the student who wants a smaller, more intimate undergraduate experience where teaching and access to professors are the main priority. Richmond is very strong at the undergraduate level, and economics there can be excellent, especially if you value close mentoring, small classes, and a campus culture centered more fully on undergraduates. For some students, that kind of access leads to better recommendation letters, more individualized advising, and a clearer path into honors work or faculty-guided research.

For internships, Tufts likely offers more options during the academic year because of location.

If you are choosing strictly on economics strength and long-term breadth, I would lean Tufts. I would only put Richmond ahead if you know you thrive most in a smaller liberal-arts-style environment where close professor relationships will matter more than the scale of the surrounding opportunities.