LiveVol. III · No. 04Cycle 2026
Cohortly
HARV · admit rate 3.4% YALE · reader avg. 12 min/file MIT · apps 25–26 38,940 STAN · admit rate 3.7% PRIN · narrative-tier 1 admits 78% IVY+ · profiles benchmarked 14,302 T20 · features modeled 42 HYPSM · median admit GPA 3.96 IVY · median admit ECs 9.2 IL. · free reports run today 417 HARV · admit rate 3.4% YALE · reader avg. 12 min/file MIT · apps 25–26 38,940 STAN · admit rate 3.7% PRIN · narrative-tier 1 admits 78% IVY+ · profiles benchmarked 14,302 T20 · features modeled 42 HYPSM · median admit GPA 3.96 IVY · median admit ECs 9.2 IL. · free reports run today 417
The Admissions Quarterly · Issue 04
14,302 profiles benchmarked this cycle

See how competitive
your profile
really is.

We benchmark your application against 500+ accepted students at Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, and MIT — then return a percentile-graded report that reads like an admissions officer's private notes, not a horoscope.

Free analysis · No card required · 4-minute intake
Built on real cohort data
Modeled on patterns from 500+ accepted applicants & not vibes, not GPT.
Harvard
Yale
Princeton
Stanford
MIT
Columbia
UPenn
Brown
Dartmouth
Cornell
UChicago
Duke
512+
Verified accepted profiles in our reference set, anonymized at intake.
42
Distinct evaluation features across academics, ECs, narrative and context.
11
T20 and Ivy-tier schools with school-specific fit modeling.
8.2%
Median percentile-rank shift after one round of recommendations applied.
§ I. The Method

How we read a profile.

We don't predict acceptance. We benchmark — your numbers, your activities, your narrative, and your context — against the actual distributions of students who got in. The output is uncomfortably specific.

01
Intake
Four minutes of structured questions: stats, ECs, awards, essays, demographics, and intended majors.
02
Benchmark
Each feature is graded on the empirical distribution of admits in your applicant pool — not a generic curve.
03
Narrative
Spike detection scores how legibly your profile tells one story to an admissions reader.
04
Verdict
A composite, percentile, school-by-school fit, and a short list of leverage points you can act on.
§ II. Sample Report

What you'll actually get.

Below is a real anonymized output from a free analysis. The premium tier extends every section — narrative spike, cohort comparison, school-specific weaknesses, and a six-week corrective roadmap.

Applicant #A-04471 · Composite Profile Read

Class of 2030 · CS + Econ · Northeast US

Free Tier
73/100
Competitive · Reach Ivy
82nd percentile vs HYPSM admits

You read as a top-tier academic with conventional polish — and a missing narrative spike. Without a sharper through-line, your file blends with ~9,000 indistinguishable Ivy reaches.

Academics
91
+13 vs cohort
Course Rigor
84
+8
Extracurriculars
64
−11
Awards · Honors
71
−1
Narrative · Spike
48
−26
Essays · Voice
69
−1
Context · Pool
55
−10

Two structural strengths

Top 3% in quantitative academics for this pool.
Your unweighted GPA + course rigor in proof-based math sits in the 97th percentile of accepted MIT/Stanford CS applicants from comparable schools.
Evidence · 5 admit cohorts, 142 matched profiles · σ = 0.04
Recognizable "long game" in one EC.
Four-year continuity in your quant research lab signals a credible domain — admissions readers reward depth like this even when output is modest.
Evidence · matches Pattern E.07 (Sustained Domain Investment)

One major weakness

Your narrative is competent but indistinct.
Eight of your nine activities reduce to a generic "smart student who does smart-student things." This is the silent killer at the Ivy tier — the file passes every filter and still gets denied at committee.
Severity · High · Affects 6 of 11 modeled schools · Tier-2 narrative cluster
School-by-school fit · sample
Harvard
Reach
Stanford
Reach
MIT
Reach
UChicago
Target
UC Berkeley
Likely
Narrative spike map
Cohort overlap (n=142)
EC ranking · Tier 1–4
Demographic adjustment
School-specific weaknesses
6-week corrective roadmap
Essay angle recommendations
The rest is in the Premium Report.
Detailed category breakdowns, narrative spike analysis, EC tiering, school-specific weaknesses, and a six-week roadmap. $15 — once.
Unlock Premium Report
§ III. A note on tone

It told me, in three lines, exactly what every $400/hr counselor had been dancing around for nine months. The narrative section made me close the laptop and walk around the block.

— Applicant K. · Princeton '29 admit · used Cohortly twice
§ IV. Pricing

Two reports. One verdict.

Start for free to get the score, percentile & limited diagnosis. Upgrade to Premium when you want the full file: ranked ECs, narrative dissection, school-specific weaknesses, and a roadmap precise enough to execute on Monday.

Tier 01
$0
Free Analysis
  • + Overall composite score (0–100)
  • + Percentile vs HYPSM admits
  • + Two structural strengths, with evidence
  • + One major weakness, with severity rating
  • + Directional fit on 2 schools (Stanford & UCLA)
  • ·No EC ranking, no roadmap, no narrative dissection
Run Free Analysis
Most unlocked · 84% of users
Tier 02
$15
Premium Report · per profile
  • + Detailed category breakdowns across all 42 features
  • + Activity-by-activity EC ranking (Tier 1–4)
  • + Narrative & spike analysis with reader-perspective notes
  • + Admissions weaknesses, ranked by severity
  • + Suggested improvements you can ship in < 6 weeks
  • + Side-by-side comparison against accepted profiles
  • + School-specific fit analysis
  • + All T20 Schools included & T5 European.
Unlock Premium Report
One-time payment · No subscription · No data resold
Discounted bundles for advisors and schools — request access
§ V. Honest Questions

What this is — and isn't.

We are not an admissions oracle. We are a benchmarking instrument. The difference matters more than people think.

Will this predict if I get in?

No, and anyone who claims to is selling something worse than this. Admissions is a committee process with too many degrees of randomness to predict. We score where you sit relative to admits, and tell you which levers actually move that.

How is this different from a Common Data Set chart?

The CDS gives you the median admit's GPA. We model 42 features, including narrative coherence and EC tiering. The things that decide your file in the actual reader's room.

Is it AI? Is it accurate?

Models do the pattern-matching, but every feature is benchmarked on real anonymized admit data. We publish our error bars on each score and flag low-confidence reads explicitly, no false certainty.

What do I need to start?

A four-minute structured intake: stats, course list, activities, awards, demographics, and one essay sample (optional), No credit card (For free tier), no personal identifiers. Applicants are hashed at intake.

Why $15, not subscription?

Most users run one or two profiles. A subscription would punish that. Pay once, get the report, leave.

Who built this?

A solo indie dev made this site with ❤️. I don't sell consulting.

Stop guessing.
Start benchmarking.

Four minutes in. A score, a percentile, and the one weakness that's quietly costing you the room. Free.

See My Chances Now