Royal Institute of Technology - KTH vs Lund University vs University of Gothenburg vs Linnaeus University - LNU vs Stockholm Business School

Side-by-side comparison from 93 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted

Quick verdict
Higher overall rating: Tie
Royal Institute of Technology - KTH: wins 3/6 categories
Lund University: wins 0/6 categories
University of Gothenburg: wins 0/6 categories
Linnaeus University - LNU: wins 0/6 categories
Stockholm Business School: wins 3/6 categories
Dalarna University: wins 0/6 categories
University of Skövde: wins 0/6 categories
Comparing
Best programme: Environmental Engineering
Lund, Sweden
4.40
Read more reviews
45 reviews
×
Best programme: Media and Communication
Best programme: AI and Data Management
Best programme: Marketing
Best programme: Business Administration and Political Science
Skövde, Sweden
Not rated
Read more reviews
0 reviews
×
Category ratings
Facilities
4.80
4.29
4.71
4.16
5.00
Win
2.00
Not rated
Location
4.20
4.30
4.86
3.83
5.00
Win
2.00
Not rated
Professors
4.40
4.21
4.57
4.12
5.00
Win
3.00
Not rated
Internationality
5.00
4.36
4.71
4.27
5.00
2.00
Not rated
Student life
4.60
Win
4.45
4.00
4.23
4.00
3.00
Not rated
Value
4.80
Win
4.19
4.29
3.81
3.00
3.00
Not rated
Accommodation
4.60
Win
4.01
2.86
3.92
3.00
3.00
Not rated
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • +World-class facilities and inspiring study atmosphere
  • +Strong academic programs with practical application and flexibility
  • +Engaging and approachable instructors
  • +Vibrant student life & community
  • +High-level education & academic structure
  • +Global diversity & inclusive environment
  • +Supportive and knowledgeable faculty
  • +Well-equipped research environments and facilities
  • +Interesting and well-organized programs
  • +Supportive and helpful professors and staff.
  • +Good facilities and diverse academic programs.
  • +Welcoming international environment and convenient resources.
  • +Excellent teaching quality and global student community
  • +Broadened horizons and expanded knowledge in business and political science
  • +Abundant working opportunities to offset living costs

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Cons
  • -Administrative & management issues frustrate students.
  • -Outdated facilities and poor maintenance are common complaints.
  • -Lack of resources and support hinder learning.
  • -Discrimination and poor job prospects in Sweden
  • -Lack of sufficient financial support and career services
  • -Poor quality and outdated educational facilities
  • -Outdated facilities and insufficient resources are a persistent problem.
  • -Lack of clear communication and organizational issues from the administration frustrate students.
  • -Course content and teaching quality are often seen as inadequate or uninspiring.
  • -Administrative and management issues, particularly concerning international student affairs.
  • -Mediocre teaching quality with limited value beyond independent learning.
  • -Lack of industry connections and career support.
  • -administrative & management issues
  • -outdated facilities
  • -lack of engagement

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Rating summary
What students say

Exceptional marks were awarded in several key areas, notably a perfect score for **Internationality**. **Facilities** and **Value** also received very high ratings. The university performs well across **Student Life** and **Accomodation**, with solid scores for **Professors** and **Location**. While no area received a low rating, **Location** represents the comparatively weakest aspect among the surveyed categories.

With an impressive student life rating of 4.45, this institution excels in extracurricular engagement. Accommodations, while solid at 4.01, represent the lowest-scoring category. Other areas like facilities, professors, location, internationality, and value all fall within a strong range between 4.18 and 4.30, indicating a generally well-rounded university experience.

This institution garners exceptional marks for its location, boasting a rating of 4.86. Facilities and internationality are also highly regarded, both scoring 4.71. Professors receive a solid 4.57, and the overall value is rated at 4.29. Student life scores a respectable 4. The weakest area by a significant margin is accommodation, with a score of just 2.86.

Academic and student life aspects of the university received high marks. The institution particularly excelled in Internationality (4.27) and Student Life (4.23), reflecting a vibrant and globally-connected campus environment. Facilities (4.16) and Professors (4.12) also garnered positive feedback. Conversely, Value (3.81) and Location (3.83) were the lowest-rated categories, suggesting areas for potential improvement. Accommodations also scored moderately (3.92).

This institution shines with perfect scores in Facilities, Professors, Location, and Internationality. Student Life also receives a strong endorsement. However, Accomodation and Value for money present areas for potential improvement, indicated by their lower ratings compared to other aspects of the university experience.

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Reviews summary
Highlights

All 12 reviews are positive, averaging 4.75/5. Students praise world-class research facilities, inclusive culture, and opportunities for theory-practice integration. Friendly, engaging instructors and diverse, flexible courses are also highlighted.

With a 4.4/5 average rating, ~98% of reviews are positive, highlighting excellent student life, high-level education, and global diversity. One negative review cited issues with the country, not the university itself.

With a 4.71/5 average rating from 7 reviews, students report overwhelmingly positive experiences, highlighting exceptional faculty and enriching academic environments. No negative feedback was recorded.

About 80% of reviews are positive, highlighting supportive professors, a welcoming atmosphere, and good facilities. A small portion (~7%) of negative feedback points to issues with teaching quality and administrative support.

This university garners a 4/5 average rating, with 100% of feedback being positive. Students praise exceptional teaching quality and opportunities for personal and academic growth.

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Rating distribution
5★
75%
53%
71%
41%
0%
0%
0%
4★
25%
36%
29%
41%
100%
0%
0%
3★
0%
9%
0%
11%
0%
100%
0%
2★
0%
2%
0%
4%
0%
0%
0%
1★
0%
0%
0%
4%
0%
0%
0%
Most useful review
Most liked

Nothing to show

Great university, but not so inclusive

The university is beautiful, there is no doubt about that. Although it is one of the most multicultural campuses in the world, the course I took was not inclusive for foreign students. The course was advertised as a course designed specifically for foreigners, with classes in English. In practice, many of the classes on the syllabus were actually in Swedish, and the ones that were in English gave exercises or texts in Swedish. I even had a disagreement with one of the professors who, although he was teaching a class that was supposed to be entirely in English, brought slides in Swedish and spoke exclusively in Swedish. When I asked during the break if the class shouldn't be in English, he ridiculed me in front of the class and said that if I was uncomfortable, I should have said so beforehand. The universitys advisors were very understanding, but in the end, I had to give up many of the assigned subjects and replace them with subjects that had nothing to do with my field, just because they were, in fact, taught in English.

Nothing to show

This Is Where Your Dreams Die

Rating: ★★☆☆☆ (2/5 — one extra star because tuition was free) I studied Software Technology at Linnaeus University between 2022 and 2025. In my experience, the quality of teaching was mediocre. I quickly stopped attending lectures because most added little beyond what I could learn independently. Industry connections were almost nonexistent: no internship support, no company-led workshops, no hackathons, and no clear pathways into the tech sector. The only recurring event was the annual job fair, but many representatives seemed unsure what they were seeking; most offered no internships or projects and there was rarely any follow-up, so it felt more promotional than student-focused. Entrepreneurship support was minimal. When we started a student project, there was no funding, no events, no network, and very limited guidance — essentially just one counsellor providing basic advice. Faculty culture felt very political and unresponsive to student feedback. When issues were raised formally, they were often dismissed, though quiet changes were occasionally made later. I personally experienced hostile and dismissive behaviour from a lecturer in the tech faculty, which I reported to the Student Union in 2024 along with other classmates. The case was closed in the lecturer’s favour, yet the university quietly implemented some of the changes we had requested. The complaint process left me uncertain about its independence, and I believe there’s a need for more transparent procedures and external oversight. On the positive side, there are a few excellent professors who genuinely care about their students and involve them in research, but they are a small minority and you have to actively seek them out. Overall, I’m deeply disappointed with the university’s approach to education and student development. I feel I wasted three years of potential growth and opportunity here. Prospective students should do thorough research and speak directly with current students before enrolling.

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