by our College Data Analytics Team
For student athletes, the right college balances academics with athletics. We have ranked 11 programs for Men’s Fencing (Division III) by academic-athletic quality, using our 2026 methodology.
So you can compare your options, College Factual evaluates each program using a blend of academic-athletic outcomes (NCAA Academic Progress Rate and Graduation Success Rate), athletic financial resources (team revenue, expenses, and aid per athlete from the EADA survey), and overall school quality, drawing on NCAA, U.S. Department of Education EADA, and IPEDS data. Learn more about our ranking methodology.
Not quite what you need? Pick a path below.
Explore the leading programs below:
Our analysis found Johns Hopkins University to be the best college for Men's Fencing (Division III) in the United States. Based in Baltimore, MD, Johns Hopkins University is a private not-for-profit institution. Per-participant team revenue is roughly $6,883, with expenses of about $6,337 per participant. Athletic aid averages $2,612 per athlete.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology ranked #2 among the best colleges for Men's Fencing (Division III). Massachusetts Institute of Technology is a private not-for-profit school based in Cambridge, MA. The program generates about $4,759 in revenue per athlete, with expenses of about $4,759 per participant. Per-athlete athletic aid is roughly $0.
Stevens Institute of Technology earned the #3 place for student athletes. Located in Hoboken, NJ, Stevens Institute of Technology is a private not-for-profit institution. The program generates about $6,644 in revenue per athlete, compared with $6,644 spent per athlete. Per-athlete athletic aid is roughly $0.
New York University landed the #4 spot for Men's Fencing (Division III). This private not-for-profit school is set in New York, NY. Per-participant team revenue is roughly $18,019, against $17,437 in expenses. Per-athlete athletic aid is roughly $0.
Haverford College ranked #5 among the best colleges for Men's Fencing (Division III). Based in Haverford, PA, Haverford College is a private not-for-profit institution. Team revenue averages $8,828 per participant, compared with $8,783 spent per athlete. The school awards about $0 in athletic aid per athlete.
Vassar College came in at #6 in this year's ranking. This private not-for-profit school is set in Poughkeepsie, NY. Per-participant team revenue is roughly $5,209, against $5,209 in expenses. The school awards about $0 in athletic aid per athlete.
Brandeis University landed the #7 spot this year. Brandeis University is a private not-for-profit school based in Waltham, MA. The program generates about $4,927 in revenue per athlete, compared with $4,927 spent per athlete. Per-athlete athletic aid is roughly $0.
Wheaton College (Massachusetts) did well this year, earning the #8 position. This private not-for-profit school is set in Norton, MA. The program generates about $11,498 in revenue per athlete, against $11,498 in expenses. Athletic aid averages $0 per athlete.
Lawrence University landed the #9 spot this year. Based in Appleton, WI, Lawrence University is a private not-for-profit institution. The program generates about $6,079 in revenue per athlete, compared with $6,079 spent per athlete. The school awards about $0 in athletic aid per athlete.
Yeshiva University came in at #10 in this year's ranking. Located in New York, NY, Yeshiva University is a private not-for-profit institution. Per-participant team revenue is roughly $3,678, with expenses of about $3,678 per participant. Per-athlete athletic aid is roughly $0.
Drew University ranked #11 on our 2026 list for Men's Fencing (Division III). Located in Madison, NJ, Drew University is a private not-for-profit institution. Per-participant team revenue is roughly $5,165, with expenses of about $5,165 per participant. The school awards about $0 in athletic aid per athlete.
*These averages are for the top 25 ranked colleges only.
This list is compiled by College Factual, 2026 edition. Rankings consider a blend of academic-athletic outcomes (NCAA Academic Progress Rate and Graduation Success Rate), athletic financial resources (team revenue, expenses, and athletic aid from the federal EADA survey), and overall school quality. The current methodology measures academic-athletic quality and does not include team win/loss performance.
References
See our data sources and methodologies.