New Forbes Rankings & Updated Aggregated Scores

No offense taken. The website is not intended to be anything more than a tool. The aggregated score is a non-biased weighted average calculation that essentially weights each of the rankings (BW, US News, Forbes, Economist, and FT) equally. Understandably, there can be much debate whether this aggregated score is worth anything, but clearly there's no intentional bias.

What I find curious, is that despite you saying the aggregated scores are off...it seems to get closer to your rankings than any of the individual sources.

Of the 8 schools you listed, below is how many of them show up in the top 8 rankings of each source:
Business Week has 5 of the schools you listed (missing Columbia, MIT, and Tuck)
US News has 7 (missing Columbia)
Forbes has 7 (missing MIT)
The Economist has 6 (missing MIT & Kellogg)
Financial Times has 7 (missing Kellogg)
The Aggregated Score has all 8 (missing none)

The order seems pretty consistent as well. In either case, the aggregated score is nothing more than a tool and agreeably there can be much debate as to its validity. Main value of the site is a central location with quick reference to useful info. Any recommendation as to how to add value to the site is more than welcome.

Interesting stats out there! Booth above Wharton (heard that Booth doing good but can any one shed some more light on it ?)