Is Johns Hopkins or Dartmouth generally more selective for undergraduate admission?

The biggest practical difference is that Dartmouth’s smaller undergraduate class and Ivy League applicant demand tend to make its admission bar feel especially compressed, while Johns Hopkins is comparably elite but draws a somewhat more academically and research-focused applicant pool. Both schools deny many highly qualified students, and neither is meaningfully “safe” for an applicant with strong grades and activities.

Over multiple admission cycles, Dartmouth has generally been viewed as marginally more selective overall for undergraduate admission. Its applicant pool is exceptionally broad, including many students seeking a traditional residential liberal-arts experience alongside strong programs in fields such as economics, government, and the sciences. Dartmouth also enrolls a relatively small first-year class, which limits available spaces.

Johns Hopkins is extremely selective and can be just as difficult, or harder, for applicants targeting highly competitive academic interests such as biomedical engineering, public health, neuroscience, or pre-med pathways. Its reputation for intensive science and research attracts many applicants with unusually strong STEM preparation, so a student’s intended field and profile can affect the practical comparison.

For a broad, schoolwide answer, Dartmouth is typically considered slightly harder to gain admission to. The difference is small enough that applicants should treat both as high-reach schools and choose between them based more on academic environment and fit than on perceived odds.