<p>That’s the problem…Chicago has several decades’ worth of catching up and it missed out on the most important trend of the century. The other schools have Wall Street to fall back on. Chicago doesn’t have any of that. It will have to outperform relative to its peers for several decades before it finally reaches parity. </p>
<p>Okay, so maybe the wrong term. Stanford has not “monopolized” tech but it has a hugely dominant position in it. The other schools also do very well but how many of those graduates go on to work in tech companies founded by Stanford graduates (see: Google)? The only major tech company I can think of based in Chicago is Groupon and it’s the laughingstock of tech (see: Andrew Mason, former CEO, who went to NU). </p>
<p>I don’t have the time or patience to compile a comparison of rankings but even in the fields where Chicago dominates, I’d assume Stanford is roughly equal (or slightly better/worse, but not by a wide margin). Yes, Chicago is great at Econ, but so are HYPSM. Quite a few of the most visible economists (in government) today are from HYPSM. </p>
<p>In the future, rankings will look like this: Stanford in the lead, then HYPM, then after that maybe Chicago/Columbia. I think Chicago can surpass Columbia because Columbia seems to be faltering a little bit. But can Chicago crack the top five? Let’s be realistic: probably not.</p>