Widgets Magazine

Record 81.1 percent yield rate reported for Class of 2019

Montag Hall, undergraduate admissions office

The Class of 2019 had a yield rate of 81.1 percent, the highest in Stanford history (KEVIN HSU / The Stanford Daily).

The Office of Undergraduate Admission reports that 81.1 percent of admitted undergraduates enrolled as students in the Class of 2019, up from 78.2 percent last year. The yield rate is the highest in Stanford history.

According to Colleen Lim M.A. ’80, director of undergraduate admission, 1,737 students confirmed enrollment out of 2,142 admitted students.

Lim said that official class statistics will be announced in the fall. The exact numbers are subject to slight changes over the course of the summer as students withdraw or defer admission. Last year, the Office of Undergraduate Admission reported a yield rate of 78.9 percent in the spring, but the rate dropped to 78.2 percent by the beginning of fall quarter.

Earlier this year, the unexpectedly high yield for the Class of 2019 prompted the re-opening of the Draw and additional housing options for upperclassmen.

This year’s record yield rate coincides with a 5.05 percent admissions rate, the lowest in Stanford’s history.


Contact Victor Xu at vxu ‘at’ stanford.edu.

About Victor Xu

Victor Xu '17 is an editor and graphics designer. An economics major, he hails from Carmel, IN. He is interested in international development and Kanye West. To contact Victor, email him at vxu ‘at’ stanford.edu.
  • iantoz

    Officially higher than Harvard’s. Congrats, Stanford. Lower acceptance rate and higher yield rate definitely tells something.

    But I do resent the admission for releasing the stat almost three weeks later than usual.



    < I think one of the reasons most people do not lose weight is because they do not have

    fun with it, as mentioned, you need to follow your passion and go within before trying

    to change a number. I go over why this is so important on a blog post about why the

    NUMBER doesn't matter. http://••►► click



  • Leon


    < Lots of good stuff here. People especially need to understand controlling fat is good

    but when you eat a fat free item alone your brain gets zero signals that you ate

    anything so you remain ravenous and either eat too much of the item or go on to eat

    something else. Get this absolutely FREE now http://••►► See more info here/2…


  • rick131

    Maybe, but Harvard wins 75% of cross admits with Stanford.

  • ’17

    Lol not true.

  • rick131

    It is true. Harvard biggest rival is and will always be Yale. Again this year, 100% of the eight students who got accepted to all eight ivies and Stanford chose Harvard or Yale, including a student from San Francisco. Same every year. Multi admits generally will choose Harvard or Yale. Stanford has a lot of recruited athletes and athletic scholarships that are locked in early, that the ivies do not have. If the athletes are removed from the equation, that would be a more comparable number to the ivies.

  • Reality

    These are only the students you know about because you read about them on the news. I am sure there are more students who got into all of the ivies+ or almost all and didnt announce it to the world cause they did not want the publicity and what not. I dont think you can draw valid conclusions from such a small data set. Also parchment rankings, which factor in every years cross admit results in their methodology, say the split is 40-60 in favor of harvard. But that includes recults from many years ago when the battle was won by harvard by a large margin. It only makes sense that the split is at least 50-50 if not in favor of stanford( probably is).

    Also yale is not really a rival of harvard ( or stanford for that matter). It is just not on the level of these two schools. Yale is considered to be at the bottom end of the top tier of elite schools( HYPSM) and even loses a significant number of cross-admits to the second tier of elite schools( penn/columbia). On the other hand if u are admitted to harvard, stanford even princeton, a second tier elite school is not even on most people’s minds. Also yale’s sub 70% yield speaks volumes on the fact that it is not on the same level as harvard or stanford.

  • marcus

    Stanford is clearly top dog.. higher yield.. lower admit rate. nuff said.

    love how you make up stats out of thin air. Btw.. Stanford biz school wins the dual admit battle over harvard by over 70% according to bloomberg financial.

    in fact Harvard college was trolling social media to artificially boost their admit rate last year.. btw that’s known as buying facebook ads to get more applicants. still came in second to Stanford… get used to it.

  • rick131

    What does that mean. I hope you realize that Stanford plays the admit game every bit as well as Harvard. (Harvard and Stanford count incomplete applications in their stats, the other ivies and MIT do not.) Stanford actively recruits in Asia and has thousands of unqualified Chinese nationals apply to inflate stats. They actually fly people in from Asia. Stanford also has a huge portion of athletes with sub par scores that the ivies just don’t. Julliard and many music schools have lower admit rates and higher yields than Stanford. The military academies have higher yields. So? Are they better? Stanford still ranks tenth in SAT scores behind most of the ivies, MIT and Chicago. Stanford ranks seventh in GPA behind Yale, Columbia, Harvard, Princeton, MIT, and Chicago. (Yale and Columbia are tied for highest combination SAT, GPA, and class rank). Top four lowest admit rates this year were Stanford, Harvard, Columbia, Yale. So you can see it is quite complicated to say what the “best school” is.

  • marcus

    Harvard actively recruits in Europe and China sport. and started buying facebook ads this year to goose their admit rate.

    Stanford is a division 1 school and competes for world class athletes with the top athletic powerhouses U of Texas, UCLA, USC etc. Harvard does not. SAT scores will be lower with this subset.

  • MG Gu

    Yield rate for H has been steady in the last few years,
    whereas it has been going up quite strongly for S.
    We shall see how they compare next year.

  • Mike

    Wow this really surprises me. Think that Stanford is hot because young people are into tech and entrepreneurship. I went to Harvard in the 1990s. Back then it was all about Harvard, then Yale, then Princeton. Stanford was considered on par with a middle Ivy like UPenn or Columbia. Stanford had a much lower yield than HYP – in the 50%s.

  • Bradmeister007

    @Mike – That was then, and this is now. Stanford’s yield rate has been at the 80% level for the past two years, far surpassing that of any Ivy League counterpart other than Harvard. Your assertion that Stanford was considered “on a par with a middle Ivy like UPenn or Columbia” back in the 1990s is simply not true. US News & World Report ranked Stanford the #1 national university as far back as 1983, and Stanford has been ranked anywhere from #2 to #5 almost every year since.

  • Bradmeister007

    @rick131 – You are absolutely incorrect. Last year’s minutes of the Stanford Academic Council confirm that Harvard won 58% of dual admits vs. Stanford in 2014. By contrast, Stanford won 59% of dual admits vs. Yale and 75% vs. Princeton last year. This year’s cross admit data has yet to be reported.

  • Ambameli

    I have two degrees from Stanford and one from Harvard so I think I have an objective opinion. First, I do think bickering about Stanford vs. Harvard is silly. Both are great schools and alumni should be proud. I think Stanford is better in egineering and technology (degrees i do not have.) However, Harvard is better in liberal arts and their reputation is defintedly better. Their admit rate and yield is lower because of self selection and demographics. There are few elite schools catering in the entire west coast. At the good public schools throughout Cali, hundreds (no exaggeration) apply to Stanford. This is not the case in NE where people apply to a wide variety of students. Stanford’s student body is comprised of 30 percent from Cali, reflecting its someone less national appeal. I do think Stanford is on par with elite schools, but would not say its better than Harvard. i lived in the west coast, and we all readily admitted Harvard was better in terms of reputation but far worse in athletics and entrepnurship!

  • Guest

    “Yale is considered to be at the bottom end of the top tier of elite schools( HYPSM) and even loses a significant number of cross-admits to the second tier of elite schools( penn/columbia).”

    Is it safe to assume that you have sources? (Don’t say “Parchment.”)

  • Guest

    Stanford’s Dean of Admissions claims that Yale has won 40-60% of cross-admits with Stanford over each of the last five years (better than MIT and Princeton), and anecdotes from Harvard officials suggest that Yale does better against Harvard than any other school does (except for Stanford, I suppose).

    If you are trumpeting the “Yale is bad at STEM” banality–sorry for interrupting, you may continue.

  • Bradmeister007

    @rick131:disqus – You are absolutely incorrect. Last year’s minutes of the Stanford Academic Council confirm that Harvard won just 58% of cross admits vs. Stanford in 2014. By contrast, Stanford won 75% of cross admits vs. Princeton and 58% vs. Yale. This year’s cross admit data has yet to be reported.


  • Bradmeister007

    @ambameli:disqus – The relatively high proportion of Stanford’s student body that originates from California (~35 percent) can be attributed to geographical proximity and the fact that California has a population of nearly 40 million people, which is greater than the combined populations of New York together with all of the New England states. It’s also a myth that Stanford’s reputation rests based principally on its strength in computer science and engineering. Nothing could be further from the truth. Stanford boasts truly world-class departments in the humanities and social sciences, most of them on a par with Harvard. US News & World Report’s latest departmental rankings places Stanford #1 in Psychology, #2 in English (tied with Harvard), #4 in History (tied with Harvard), #2 in Political Science (ahead of Yale), #4 in Sociology (ahead of Harvard), #2 in Linguistics (ahead of Harvard), and #5 in Economics (ahead of Yale).

  • mel akada

    “Reality” needs a dose of reality. Yale takes more from Harvard than anyone and wins head-to-head against P by a good margin, M by a smaller margin, and (until the last couple of years) Stanford. Yale loses almost no one to any other school. Its yield rate (nearly 70%) trails only H and S. Until about 4-5 years ago, H was #1 and Yale #2 in admission stats, and no one else was close. Stanford is hot and is now up with Harvard. Although it’s silly to talk about any one being at the bottom of the top tier (HYPSM), there are only 2 candidates for that slot: P on the numbers, and M because its applicant and yield pool are so skewed to STEM.

  • Puma_01

    rick131: It’s not complicated. 1) Stanford is an elite university with many thousands of qualified applicants. The fact that Stanford’s SAT scores may be lower than some other universities is NOT because students with higher scores aren’t applying, but rather because Stanford has chosen not to weigh SAT scores as heavily in the admissions process. For example, in 2014 there were more than 7000 students with perfect 800’s on the math section of their SATs who applied to Stanford. Yet only about 9% (approx. 600) of these “wunderkinds” (i.e., kids who have become experts at solving 10th grade level math problems on a timed multiple choice test) were admitted. See: http://admission.stanford.edu/basics/selection/profile.html A similar concept applies as it relates to GPAs. For example, at a local high school recently there were a couple dozen people tied for valedictorian with perfect GPAs. Yet, of the 4 students who were admitted to Stanford that year, only 1 came from the valedictorian pool. 2) It is pretty easy to distinguish between national universities, like Harvard and Stanford, and specialty institutions, like arts conservatories and military academies. Apples and oranges, my friend.

  • Puma_01

    Stanford may have a geographical advantage with regard to West Coast students, but it has always had to contend with a geographical disadvantage as it applies to the East Coast. Why come all the way out to California when there are 3 or 4 top schools within driving distance of your parents’ home? But with an overall yield rate of 81.1%, which is close to the highest yield rate in history for any national university, I think it’s safe to say that any geographic disadvantage has now been overcome.

  • Puma_01

    Amazing. Per a prior faculty Senate report, the last time Harvard held a 75% cross-admit “win” advantage vs Stanford was for students enrolling in 2006, when Stanford’s yield rate was 69%. That same year, Stanford enjoyed a mere 54-46 advantage over Princeton and suffered 30-70 and 33-67 disadvantages to Yale and MIT, respectively. (In other words, Stanford’s cross-admit win percentages increased in that interval as follows – Harvard: from 25 to 42, Yale: 30 to 58, Princeton: 54 to 75, and MIT: 33 to 63.) That’s quite a change. I think it’s safe to say at least a portion of Stanford’s improving yield is attributable to it being able to attract more of the students that it would have historically lost to the other four most competitive universities.

  • David Parker

    I have a Stanford MA and PHD and taught there for 2 quarters as I was finishing my dissertation. I have nothing negative to say about Stanford (or the ivies, for that matter), but if you replace “best school” with best UNDERGRADUATE education, they all fall short of the small liberal arts colleges like Amherst, Williams, Swarthmore, etc. None of those schools had grad students like me teaching classes. And while I think I did an ok job teaching at Stanford, my profs at Wesleyan were infinitely better. I’m always amazed by those who confuse reputation with quality. Even when the rep is deserved, as is the case with Stanford, it is for research and grad training, not undergrad teaching.

  • Puma_01

    I agree that the top liberal arts colleges you mention have great undergraduate programs. However, in recent years Stanford has started to borrow and more of the best these more intimate institutions have to offer. Most notable in my view has been Stanford’s expansion of the introductory seminar program for Freshmen and Sophomore students. https://undergrad.stanford.edu/programs/introsems/explore There are very few institutions in the world that can match what Stanford offers its young students in these seminars. Imagine sitting in an undergraduate class of just 12 students with Condi Rice or the former Secretary of Energy leading the discussion! Stanford remains a large research institution, but I think it would be hard to argue that accepting one’s admission to their undergraduate program these days involves much of a compromise.

  • ujamite

    Actually Stanford won the cross-admit battle with Harvard for the first time this year 52-48!