Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro - UFRJ vs Estácio vs Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro - UERJ vs University of Cândido Mendes - UCAM vs Pontificate Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro - PUC-Rio

Side-by-side comparison from 48 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted

Quick verdict
Higher overall rating: Brazilian Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine - IBMR (5.00)
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro - UFRJ: wins 0/5 categories
Estácio: wins 0/5 categories
Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro - UERJ: wins 0/5 categories
University of Cândido Mendes - UCAM: wins 0/5 categories
Pontificate Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro - PUC-Rio: wins 2/5 categories
Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro: wins 0/5 categories
Brazilian Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine - IBMR: wins 3/5 categories
Comparing
Best programme: Architecture and Urbanism
Sao Paulo, Brazil
4.30
Read more reviews
24 reviews
×
Best programme: Law
Best programme: Computer and Information Science
Not rated
Read more reviews
0 reviews
×
Best programme: Architecture and Urban Planning
Best programme: Library and Information Science
Best programme: Bachelor in ICT
Category ratings
Facilities
3.20
4.09
4.00
Not rated
4.25
4.00
5.00
Win
Location
3.53
4.05
4.50
Not rated
5.00
Win
4.00
4.00
Professors
4.40
4.26
4.50
Not rated
4.50
5.00
5.00
Internationality
4.27
3.35
3.00
Not rated
4.50
Win
4.00
3.00
Student life
3.57
3.91
3.50
Not rated
4.50
4.00
5.00
Win
Value
4.60
3.70
5.00
Not rated
5.00
4.00
3.00
Accommodation
3.00
3.47
2.50
Not rated
3.00
3.00
5.00
Win
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • +Extensive opportunities for research and extracurricular projects.
  • +High-quality, knowledgeable professors and mentors.
  • +Strong industry connections and company partnerships.
  • +Excellent professors and quality teaching
  • +User-friendly online platform and strong customer support
  • +Great infrastructure and flexible learning options
  • +Excellent professors and project encouragement
  • +Strong infrastructure and facilities
  • +Career opportunities and international recognition

Nothing to show

  • +Excellent professors and academic programs
  • +Beautiful campus and welcoming environment
  • +Strong career and professional development opportunities
  • +Highly qualified faculty and diverse educational techniques
  • +Freedom to explore various areas of knowledge
  • +Practical and accessible learning environment
  • +Helpful professors and useful classes
  • +Welcoming atmosphere
Cons
  • -Students dislike administrative and management issues.
  • -Outdated facilities and resources are a common complaint.
  • -Concerns exist about the quality of teaching and curriculum.
  • -Financial focus over student welfare and care.
  • -Inconsistent teaching quality and poor support for distance learners.
  • -Unclear and unsupportive administrative policies.
  • -Administrative and management issues cause frustration.
  • -Outdated facilities and resources hinder learning.
  • -Lack of clear communication and support is a recurring problem.

Nothing to show

  • -Administrative & management issues are a frequent source of frustration.
  • -Outdated facilities and a lack of modern resources are consistently criticized.
  • -Poor communication and unclear expectations lead to student dissatisfaction.
  • -Administrative and management issues cause significant frustration.
  • -Outdated facilities and resources hinder learning and comfort.
  • -Poor communication and lack of responsiveness from staff are a recurring problem.
  • -Outdated facilities and poor maintenance are consistently problematic.
  • -Inefficient administrative processes and lack of clear communication cause frustration.
  • -Limited course selection and rigid academic policies hinder student progress.
Rating summary
What students say

Overall, this university demonstrates a strong performance, particularly excelling in **Value** and **Professors**, both receiving very high marks. **Internationality** is also a significant strength. Conversely, **Accomodation** emerges as the weakest area, scoring the lowest. **Facilities** and **Location** received moderate ratings, while **Student Life** is also a positive aspect.

With a robust score of 4.26, professors are consistently rated as the strongest aspect of the university. Facilities and location also received favorable marks around 4.0. Areas requiring improvement include accommodation, with a score of 3.47, and internationality, which stands at 3.35, indicating these are the weakest points in the overall evaluation.

The university exhibits strong performance in key areas, particularly in **Value (5)**, **Professors (4.5)**, and **Location (4.5)**. Conversely, **Accomodation (2.5)** stands out as the weakest aspect. Other areas, including Facilities and Student Life, receive solid scores, while Internationality is rated moderately.

Nothing to show

This university garners exceptional marks in several key areas. Location and value are rated a perfect 5, alongside a strong student life and internationality at 4.5. Professors also receive a high rating of 4.5. The weakest area identified is accommodation, with a rating of 3. Facilities are rated well at 4.25.

Overall, the university garners solid ratings across multiple aspects. It particularly excels in the **Professors** category, achieving a perfect score. **Facilities**, **Location**, **Student Life**, and **Internationality** all received strong marks at 4 out of 5. The lowest rating was for **Accomodation** at 3, indicating this area might benefit from further development. The **Value** proposition is also rated positively at 4.

Exceptional marks highlight the university's strengths in facilities, professors, student life, and accommodation, all receiving perfect scores. Conversely, internationality and value are identified as areas for improvement, with lower ratings of 3. The location also received a good, but not perfect, score of 4.

Reviews summary
Highlights

All 16 reviews are positive, with an average rating of 4.44/5. Students highlight enriching experiences, valuable classes, and numerous opportunities for research and projects. Some mention infrastructure issues and teaching methods as minor drawbacks.

Most students (~74%) praise excellent professors, quality teaching, and user-friendly online platforms. A small percentage (~8.3%) cited financial focus and inconsistent teaching methods, with some dissatisfaction for distance learning.

With a 4/5 average rating from two reviews, student feedback is overwhelmingly positive. Positive themes highlight excellent infrastructure, career opportunities, and great laboratories. Minor concerns about room ventilation and bathrooms were noted.

Nothing to show

All four reviews are positive, with an average rating of 4.5/5 stars. Students praise the welcoming environment, knowledgeable professors, beautiful campus, and opportunities for academic and professional growth.

Based on one review, the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro is highly rated at 4/5 stars. The positive feedback highlights qualified faculty and a conducive campus environment. Infrastructure and scholarship incentives were noted for improvement.

With an average rating of 5/5, the single review is entirely positive. The reviewer found professors helpful, classes practically useful, and the environment welcoming, recommending the university for a practical experience.

Rating distribution
5★
44%
54%
0%
0%
50%
0%
100%
4★
56%
29%
100%
0%
50%
100%
0%
3★
0%
8%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
2★
0%
4%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
1★
0%
4%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Most useful review
Most liked

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Review our Privacy Policy for more details.
Close