Are my admissions chances meaningfully different at Columbia and Brown?

Based on the profile you describe, Columbia and Brown are not meaningfully different in predictability: both are reaches for even highly qualified applicants. Neither school is “realistic” in the sense that strong grades, rigor, and well-matched activities can reliably produce an admit. The meaningful difference is whether your record makes a more distinctive case for one school’s academic culture.

Columbia may be the more natural fit for a student who can show sustained interest in engaging required common texts and ideas, learning amid New York City’s institutions and communities, and pursuing a focused academic direction within a structured undergraduate experience. Its Core Curriculum is central to the application’s fit question, so essays should make clear why shared intellectual foundations appeal to you rather than merely praising the city or the school’s prestige.

Brown may make more sense for a student whose transcript and activities demonstrate genuine self-direction: building unusual combinations of interests, taking initiative without much external structure, and contributing thoughtfully in an exploratory, collaborative academic environment. Its Open Curriculum is not simply permission to avoid requirements; Brown wants evidence that you would use that freedom purposefully.

Treat both as highly selective reaches, but make each application sharply school-specific. A persuasive Columbia application emphasizes why structure and shared inquiry would deepen your goals; a persuasive Brown application shows that you already know how to create intellectual direction when given freedom.