The Future of Graduate Admissions Testing: What the GMAT Focus and Shorter GRE Mean for Applicants

For decades, the GMAT and GRE stood as dominant gateways to graduate programs, especially MBA degrees. They were lengthy, high-stakes exams requiring extensive preparation, often dictating the trajectory of an applicant’s future. But by late 2023, both the GMAT and GRE underwent transformative revisions. The GMAT Focus Edition was launched to replace the traditional GMAT, and a new, shorter GRE format emerged. These weren’t minor updates. They were fundamental shifts in how each organization envisioned the future of standardized testing. To fully grasp the significance of these changes, it’s essential to understand why they happened, what motivated them, and how they reflect broader changes in the graduate admissions ecosystem.

A primary driver of these changes was a widespread reevaluation of what standardized tests should measure. For years, critics argued that the traditional formats overemphasized time pressure, obscure content, and test-taking strategy at the expense of real-world skills. Business schools increasingly recognized that success in graduate programs was not best predicted by an applicant’s ability to spot grammar errors or solve rare mathematical puzzles. The move toward shorter and more focused exams was, at its core, a response to those concerns. Both the GMAT and GRE revisions reflect a conscious effort to modernize these tests so they better align with the skills graduate programs truly value—data literacy, logical reasoning, and time management.

The GMAT Focus Edition reflects this shift most dramatically. It discarded the Analytical Writing Assessment and the Verbal section’s Sentence Correction component—long considered hallmarks of the test. In their place, the test now features three core sections: Quantitative Reasoning, Verbal Reasoning, and a dramatically enhanced Data Insights section. The removal of the essay was a recognition that most business schools already assess writing through application essays and interviews. Similarly, sentence correction was criticized for emphasizing rote grammar knowledge rather than clear, logical communication. By streamlining these components, the GMAT Focus delivers a more efficient and relevant evaluation of a candidate’s readiness for business school.

In contrast, the shorter GRE was less about changing what the test measures and more about improving the experience of taking the test. ETS, the organization behind the GRE, reduced the number of questions and eliminated the second Analytical Writing task, cutting the test time nearly in half. Importantly, the core content—Quantitative, Verbal, and one Analytical Writing essay—remains largely the same. The GRE did not reinvent its structure to the same extent as the GMAT Focus, but it recognized that the sheer length of the old version was a barrier to many candidates. By reducing time without sacrificing content depth, ETS made the GRE more accessible, especially to applicants with busy schedules or those for whom testing anxiety increases with prolonged exam sessions.

The decision to shorten both tests also came amid increasing competition between the two. Business schools have long accepted either the GMAT or the GRE, and students have become increasingly savvy about choosing the test that best fits their strengths. The GMAT, once the undisputed standard for MBA admissions, has seen growing competition from the GRE in recent years. Test-takers who felt more confident in verbal reasoning or who disliked the GMAT’s adaptive math section often opted for the GRE. In response, GMAC needed to differentiate the GMAT in a way that made it feel not just competitive, but superior for MBA applicants. The Focus Edition is a direct response to that challenge. By zeroing in on business-relevant skills and eliminating perceived filler content, it aims to reestablish the GMAT as the gold standard for serious MBA candidates.

These changes were not developed in isolation. They reflect deep feedback loops from admissions officers, applicants, and education researchers. For years, test-takers complained about redundant sections, outdated question types, and unclear scoring methods. Schools similarly questioned whether the tests were predictive enough of academic success to justify the stress and cost they imposed. The new versions of both the GMAT and GRE reflect an answer to those concerns. They maintain rigor while aiming to reduce unnecessary difficulty. They aim to measure what matters, not just what’s easy to test.

From the applicant’s perspective, the shorter and more focused exams offer multiple advantages. First, they require less total preparation time. With fewer question types and shorter test durations, studying can be more targeted and efficient. Second, they reduce the likelihood of burnout. Many students perform worse on the final sections of long exams due to fatigue. Shortening the tests helps maintain focus throughout, potentially leading to more accurate assessments of ability. Third, they simplify the decision process. Candidates can more clearly see what each test values and choose based on their individual strengths rather than test structure quirks.

The GMAT Focus Edition also introduces a more transparent and flexible testing experience. Unlike the older version, which locked students into each answer as they moved through the test, the new GMAT allows test-takers to flag and review questions within a section before submitting it. This seemingly small change has significant implications. It allows test-takers to manage time more strategically, return to questions they initially skipped, and reduce stress from making hasty decisions. It mirrors the way real-world problem solving often works: you don’t always need to answer everything in sequence, and being able to revisit your work is part of thoughtful decision-making.

On the GRE side, the shorter exam retains its linear structure but benefits from reduced length in a different way. By halving the number of verbal and quantitative questions, it speeds up the pacing while maintaining a consistent challenge. Students no longer need to sit for nearly four hours, which historically was a significant mental and physical burden. The change is particularly welcome for international applicants who may face additional challenges like language barriers, time zone differences, or access to testing centers. A shorter test helps level the playing field across these variables.

While both test revisions prioritize efficiency, they still reflect different philosophies. The GMAT Focus is narrowly targeted toward business school applicants. Its Data Insights section, which blends elements of critical reasoning, data analysis, and interpretation of visual information, mirrors tasks students face in MBA classrooms. In contrast, the GRE remains a generalist exam. It appeals to a broader audience applying to a wide range of graduate programs, and its vocabulary-heavy verbal section reflects that scope. For MBA applicants who are strong in verbal reasoning and less confident in math or data analysis, the GRE may still be a more comfortable option. But for those aiming to showcase their readiness for a data-driven, quantitative business environment, the GMAT Focus now offers a cleaner, more purposeful path.

There is also a growing sense that test design must reflect changing values in education. As MBA programs adapt their curricula to focus more on analytics, teamwork, and real-world problem solving, admissions exams must evolve accordingly. The GMAT Focus Edition embraces this with a scoring model that combines your performance across the three sections into a single score, allowing for greater clarity and comparability. The GRE, for now, retains separate verbal and quantitative scores, which offers flexibility but may feel less integrated for those applying specifically to business programs.

Perhaps most importantly, both changes send a message to applicants: testing is no longer about endurance, but relevance. The move away from bloated formats and toward focused, manageable exams suggests a future in which standardized testing regains trust by emphasizing fairness, accessibility, and alignment with real-world skills. Applicants are no longer forced to navigate arcane question types that feel divorced from academic or professional reality. Instead, they’re being evaluated on competencies that matter—data reasoning, logical thinking, and effective communication under pressure.

These updates may not erase the anxiety that standardized tests often generate, but they significantly lower the barriers to preparation and success. With less time needed to prepare and clearer alignment between test content and graduate program demands, students can enter the admissions process with more confidence. For admissions committees, these changes provide a more reliable signal of who is ready for graduate-level work.

In short, the GMAT and GRE have not simply been shortened—they’ve been refocused. Each now tells a clearer story about what graduate programs expect and how applicants can demonstrate their potential. That clarity, more than any specific change, is what marks the beginning of a new era in graduate admissions testing.

Breaking Down the GMAT Focus Edition: What Makes It Different

The GMAT Focus Edition was not just a shorter version of the previous GMAT—it was a reimagined exam. GMAC, the test’s administrator, undertook a radical overhaul aimed at modernizing the test’s structure, simplifying its format, and enhancing its relevance to MBA programs. In doing so, they created an exam that speaks more directly to the analytical and decision-making demands of business school. The result is a streamlined, three-section test that places a strong emphasis on data interpretation, critical reasoning, and time management. Understanding how the GMAT Focus is built—section by section—reveals how it reshapes the way students prepare and how schools evaluate applicants.

The GMAT Focus Edition contains three sections: Quantitative Reasoning, Verbal Reasoning, and Data Insights. Each section lasts 45 minutes, for a total testing time of just over two hours. This represents a significant reduction from the nearly four-hour length of the previous GMAT. But more than just cutting time, GMAC changed what is tested and how it’s tested. Quantitative Reasoning now focuses exclusively on problem-solving. The old version’s data sufficiency and geometry questions are gone, meaning students can focus entirely on core algebra, arithmetic, and word problems. This change makes the section more straightforward and reduces the amount of specialized preparation needed.

The Verbal Reasoning section has also been narrowed in scope. Sentence Correction, once a heavily tested and often dreaded component of the verbal section, has been eliminated. What remains are Reading Comprehension and Critical Reasoning, both of which are strongly aligned with the skills students will use in an MBA classroom—interpreting arguments, analyzing logic, and evaluating claims. This content shift represents a conscious move away from surface-level language mechanics and toward high-level comprehension and argumentation. For many test-takers, this makes the section feel more intellectually engaging and practically relevant.

But the most notable innovation in the GMAT Focus is the new Data Insights section. This is not simply a repackaged version of the previous Integrated Reasoning section—it is a full integration of quantitative, verbal, and visual analysis skills. Questions in this section require you to evaluate charts, tables, and graphs; interpret quantitative relationships; assess information across multiple sources; and apply logical reasoning. It blends the analytical mindset of the quantitative section with the argumentative rigor of the verbal section, creating a space where test-takers must think holistically. Business schools value this integration because it mirrors how managers and analysts must work with incomplete or ambiguous data to make strategic decisions.

This redesigned structure brings with it a new scoring scale. The GMAT Focus Edition abandons the traditional 200-800 score range in favor of a new scale from 205 to 805, in 10-point increments. This reset means that Focus Edition scores are not directly comparable to legacy GMAT scores, which may seem like a drawback at first. But this new scale is designed to reflect the updated test’s different weighting and to eliminate confusion about how scores across different sections contribute to the overall performance. Each of the three sections is equally weighted, and the total score is based on the combined performance. This more balanced scoring system encourages applicants to prepare evenly across all three sections rather than optimizing for a skewed performance profile.

The GMAT Focus Edition also introduces a number of candidate-friendly features that improve the test-taking experience. Chief among them is the ability to bookmark and review questions within a section before submitting it. Unlike the previous GMAT, which was fully computer-adaptive and did not allow backtracking, the Focus Edition offers limited flexibility within each section. This change helps reduce the pressure of having to make split-second decisions without the chance to reconsider. It more closely mirrors real-world decision-making, where you often get to revisit your work and refine your answers.

Another notable change is the removal of the AWA essay. While this may seem like a reduction in rigor, it’s more accurately a refocusing of priorities. Admissions committees already rely heavily on personal statements, written responses, and interview interactions to assess communication skills. The elimination of the essay section allows the GMAT Focus to concentrate on its unique value—measuring cognitive and analytical reasoning. It’s not that writing doesn’t matter anymore; it’s that standardized testing isn’t the best format for evaluating it in a high-stakes admissions context.

The Focus Edition also allows candidates to select the order in which they take the three sections. This might seem like a minor detail, but it has significant implications for performance. Some test-takers perform better when they tackle their strongest section first to build confidence; others prefer to get their weakest section out of the way. Giving test-takers this control helps reduce anxiety and allows them to approach the test strategically. It’s a subtle but powerful way of respecting individual differences in test-taking style and cognitive stamina.

All of these changes fundamentally alter how students prepare. With fewer question types and less content breadth, preparation becomes more focused and efficient. There is less need for memorization of obscure grammar rules or niche math techniques. Instead, successful preparation centers on developing analytical thinking, improving reading comprehension, and practicing data interpretation. Test prep providers have had to rapidly adjust to this shift, moving away from content drills and toward reasoning-based approaches. For students, this often means more engagement with real-world problems, case studies, and data sets—resources that not only build test readiness but also support future academic success.

Importantly, the GMAT Focus Edition remains adaptive. Within each section, the difficulty of questions still adjusts based on your performance. But because the test allows reviewing and flagging within sections, it feels less punishing and more interactive. This preserves the adaptive test’s efficiency while softening its inflexibility. It’s a design that strikes a balance between precision and humanity—capturing a more nuanced picture of an applicant’s strengths without over-engineering the testing experience.

Schools have responded positively to the GMAT Focus Edition. Many admissions committees appreciate its modern structure and clear alignment with MBA curricula. The Data Insights section, in particular, has drawn praise for testing the kinds of analytical and decision-making skills that are increasingly central to business education. In an era where data literacy is often more valuable than rote calculation, the GMAT Focus signals an understanding of what today’s MBA programs demand. This makes it more than a test—it’s a signal to applicants about the intellectual orientation of the programs they’re applying to.

There are, of course, adjustments to be made. The new scoring scale requires recalibration of expectations for what constitutes a competitive score. Applicants, schools, and prep providers are still in the process of building a shared understanding of percentile equivalencies. But over time, as more test-takers complete the Focus Edition and score data accumulates, this new framework will become second nature. The early response suggests that while change can be disruptive, the improvements in clarity, efficiency, and relevance outweigh any short-term confusion.

Another aspect worth noting is how the GMAT Focus Edition levels the playing field. By reducing time and eliminating outdated content, it reduces the advantage of those who can afford expensive tutoring or have extensive familiarity with traditional testing structures. This supports broader goals of access and fairness. While no standardized test can be entirely free of bias or inequality, the Focus Edition is a step toward a model that evaluates applicants on abilities that are both teachable and transferable. It rewards practice and strategy, but not at the expense of substance.

In summary, the GMAT Focus Edition is a thoughtfully restructured exam that brings the GMAT into alignment with modern graduate education. It retains the rigor of a challenging test while removing unnecessary barriers. It invites test-takers to engage with real-world problems rather than outdated formats. It balances simplicity and depth, speed and flexibility, analytics and reasoning. For MBA applicants, it offers a clearer, more efficient path to proving readiness for business school. And for schools, it offers a sharper lens through which to view applicant potential.

Understanding the Shorter GRE: What Changed and Why It Matters

The GRE, administered by ETS, has long positioned itself as the more flexible, general-purpose alternative to the GMAT. Its value lies in its broad applicability—used for both business school and graduate school applications—and its emphasis on general reasoning and academic aptitude. But until recently, the GRE’s length and complexity were often cited as drawbacks. ETS responded by introducing a significantly shorter version of the test, reducing total testing time from nearly four hours to just under two. This redesign makes the GRE more accessible, more efficient, and in many ways more competitive with the GMAT Focus Edition. Understanding how the shorter GRE works—and what hasn’t changed—is essential for anyone deciding between the two exams.

The new GRE format includes just five sections: one each of Quantitative Reasoning and Verbal Reasoning (each counted twice for scoring purposes), and a single Analytical Writing task. This is a substantial reduction from the previous format, which had two full sections of quant and verbal plus two writing tasks. The elimination of one essay and the cutting of content from the verbal and quant sections reflect a broader goal: to preserve the GRE’s core value while modernizing it for a faster-paced admissions landscape. In essence, ETS has distilled the test down to its most predictive components, while still preserving its statistical reliability.

The single Analytical Writing task now requires test-takers to respond to an Issue prompt only. The Argument essay has been removed, simplifying the writing portion and reducing cognitive fatigue. This change reflects a growing consensus among schools that one well-executed essay is sufficient to assess writing skills in a standardized setting. Given that most graduate programs—business or otherwise—also consider personal statements, essays, and other written materials, there is little loss in omitting the second essay. Instead, students are able to focus their energy on crafting a single, thoughtful response, and schools still receive a reliable measure of writing ability.

The Verbal Reasoning section remains focused on reading comprehension, text completion, and sentence equivalence. But with fewer questions overall, students are required to demonstrate the same level of reasoning ability in a more concentrated time frame. There is no significant change in the types of questions, which means that preparation remains consistent with prior GRE standards. However, pacing becomes more critical. With less time and fewer opportunities to recover from mistakes, accuracy and efficiency are paramount. The GRE’s verbal section continues to emphasize nuanced vocabulary and inference-based reading, which can make it more challenging for non-native English speakers—but it also provides a strong platform for those with strengths in language and logic.

Quantitative Reasoning also retains its familiar structure: problem-solving and quantitative comparisons. The shorter test simply includes fewer questions, but these questions still span arithmetic, algebra, geometry, and data analysis. Like the GMAT Focus, the shorter GRE avoids overemphasizing obscure or highly technical topics. But unlike the GMAT, it still includes geometry and quantitative comparison—areas that can require specialized strategies. This makes the GRE slightly broader in scope, which may appeal to test-takers with strong math fundamentals or a more academic orientation.

Importantly, the shorter GRE does not change its scoring scale. The 130–170 scale for both the verbal and quant sections remains intact, as does the 0–6 score for Analytical Writing. This decision allows ETS to maintain score continuity over time, ensuring that shorter GRE scores are directly comparable to those from the older version. For test-takers, this continuity simplifies interpretation: a 160 on the new GRE means the same thing as a 160 on the old one. For schools, this stability supports long-term score trends and reduces confusion about how to interpret applicant performance.

One of the biggest benefits of the shorter GRE is the test-day experience. Reduced fatigue and stress translate into better performance for many candidates, especially those balancing test prep with work, school, or family commitments. The streamlined structure allows test-takers to focus more fully on each section without the mental drain of a four-hour exam. It also reduces logistical barriers—such as time off from work, availability of long testing slots, or extended childcare arrangements—which can disproportionately affect non-traditional or underrepresented applicants. By making the GRE more flexible and efficient, ETS is helping to level the playing field and improve access to graduate education.

The shorter GRE also signals a broader trend in standardized testing: a shift from exhaustive measurement toward targeted assessment. ETS is betting that a shorter test with tightly focused sections can provide just as much predictive value as a longer one. Preliminary research suggests that this bet is paying off. Internal studies have found high correlations between scores on the short-form GRE and the longer version, indicating that the shorter exam retains its validity. This matters because schools still want reliable, consistent data—but they are increasingly aware of the limitations and stresses of traditional testing formats.

For applicants, the new GRE raises important strategic questions. With the GRE and GMAT Focus now similar in length, structure, and test-day convenience, the decision between them comes down to content, skill set, and school preferences. The GRE continues to favor students with stronger verbal and vocabulary abilities, while the GMAT Focus leans into logical reasoning and data analysis. The GRE’s continued inclusion of geometry and its broader verbal scope may give some students a comparative edge. Others may find the focused, reasoning-based GMAT better aligned with their strengths and business school goals.

Graduate business programs have generally welcomed the shorter GRE, just as they have the GMAT Focus. Admissions officers are not concerned with the number of questions a student answers, but rather with the clarity and consistency of the data. A shorter, more efficient test that still produces reliable scores is in everyone’s interest. In fact, the shorter GRE may make it easier for applicants to submit competitive scores, re-test if needed, or even combine testing with other application elements more seamlessly.

It’s also worth noting that the shorter GRE may encourage more dual applicants—those who are applying to both business school and other types of graduate programs. For these students, the GRE offers the advantage of flexibility. A single test can support a range of application types, from economics PhDs to MBA programs. This adaptability has always been a key strength of the GRE, and the shorter version enhances its appeal by reducing the test’s logistical and psychological burden. Students no longer have to weigh the GRE’s generalist benefits against the time and stamina costs of a lengthy exam.

Preparation for the shorter GRE doesn’t change drastically, but it does become more strategic. There’s less room for error, so timing practice and question accuracy become central to any prep plan. Since the test still covers the same question types, existing study materials remain valid, though test-takers may need to adapt how they use them. Fewer practice questions may be required, but more emphasis should be placed on realistic test simulations and stress management. The shorter GRE rewards confidence, focus, and clarity—skills that are developed not just through drills, but through smart planning and mental readiness.

In summary, the shorter GRE represents a thoughtful evolution in standardized testing. It respects the time and energy of test-takers while preserving the exam’s core strengths. It brings the GRE in line with modern expectations about assessment—shorter, sharper, and more strategic. For applicants, it opens the door to a more manageable test prep experience without sacrificing the value or competitiveness of their scores. For schools, it delivers high-quality data in a format that reflects the demands of today’s academic and professional environments. The changes are practical, the results are promising, and the implications are positive for nearly everyone involved in the graduate admissions process.

Strategic Implications for MBA Applicants Choosing Between the GMAT Focus and the Shorter GRE

Now that both the GMAT Focus Edition and the shorter GRE have officially launched, MBA applicants face a renewed strategic decision: which exam offers the best alignment with their personal strengths, admissions goals, and preparation bandwidth? The question is not just about content but also about context—what each test demands, how it fits into your life, and how it positions you as a candidate. As schools increasingly emphasize holistic admissions, the role of standardized tests is evolving. A well-chosen and well-executed exam can elevate an application, but the wrong choice—or a misaligned strategy—can hinder even the most talented applicants.

The GMAT Focus Edition offers a more streamlined experience with three sections: Quantitative Reasoning, Verbal Reasoning, and the newly emphasized Data Insights. One of its most distinctive changes is the removal of sentence correction, which previously dominated the verbal section and required mastery of grammar and usage rules. By eliminating this section, GMAC has lowered the preparation barrier for many students, especially international applicants and those with weaker language skills. This move also acknowledges feedback from business schools indicating that grammar precision is less important than overall communication and analytical reasoning.

On the other hand, the introduction of the Data Insights section has raised the stakes for a different set of skills. Now fully integrated into the composite score, this section tests abilities in interpreting charts, graphs, and complex tables—skills that align more directly with what MBA programs value in terms of business analytics, decision-making, and problem-solving. In the past, Integrated Reasoning was a separate, non-core score that admissions committees often overlooked. Now, Data Insights is central to the score report, and candidates must take it seriously. This shift means that test-takers who have professional experience working with data—or who are comfortable navigating visual information—may have a natural advantage on the GMAT Focus.

Another key innovation is the GMAT Focus’s ability to review and change up to three answers per section after completion. This is a significant departure from traditional computer-adaptive testing, where each answer locks in your path. The flexibility to return to questions allows for better time management, especially for students who occasionally get stuck. Time mismanagement has always been a critical reason for underperformance on the GMAT. This new review feature offers a partial safety net, provided that test-takers use it judiciously. It doesn’t eliminate the need for pacing discipline but does give students more control and the chance to correct obvious missteps.

By contrast, the shorter GRE remains linear in design—there’s no opportunity to revisit questions once they’re completed. However, it compensates with broader verbal content and less emphasis on real-time data interpretation. The verbal section still leans heavily on vocabulary, reading comprehension, and text-based reasoning. That makes it more challenging for test-takers who are less comfortable with language nuance but advantageous for those with strong reading and contextual deduction skills. The quant section remains slightly more academic, continuing to test geometry and algebra with a slightly wider content range than the GMAT Focus.

If you’re choosing between the two, the decision often boils down to your strengths. If you are someone who performs well under pressure, thinks quickly, and has a background that includes reading charts or interpreting business data, the GMAT Focus might offer a better platform. If you are stronger in vocabulary, enjoy structured reading, or come from a non-business background but still plan to pursue an MBA, the GRE might serve you better. Since business schools increasingly accept either test equally, the emphasis is less on the name of the test and more on how well your score fits into your overall profile.

It’s also worth considering how the changes affect study planning. The removal of sentence correction from the GMAT Focus can significantly reduce the required study time, especially for non-native English speakers. Since grammar drills and error identification were among the most labor-intensive parts of prep, their elimination can cut hours off weekly study plans. The addition of Data Insights might balance that time reduction somewhat, but many applicants already possess baseline skills in data interpretation due to work experience or undergraduate coursework. This means the learning curve may be less steep than preparing for grammar-intensive sections of the old GMAT.

The GRE, for its part, doesn’t significantly change preparation strategies, but the shorter format means each question carries more weight. There’s less margin for error and a stronger emphasis on consistent performance. That pressure may affect how some students approach test day, especially if they rely on stamina or incremental recovery across a longer exam. On the flip side, those who find long testing sessions overwhelming may experience a confidence boost knowing the exam ends in under two hours. The GRE’s unchanged content also means students using older prep materials or courses can continue without major disruption.

Another important factor is how schools view each test. Business schools generally maintain test-agnostic policies, though some programs do prefer the GMAT for its closer alignment with business school curricula. The GMAT Focus Edition, with its increased emphasis on data analysis, further cements this alignment. However, many programs value diversity of thought and background, and the GRE’s use across disciplines may appeal to candidates with liberal arts, humanities, or science degrees. If you’re applying to dual-degree programs (e.g., MBA/MPP, MBA/MA), the GRE’s flexibility across disciplines becomes a significant advantage.

Applicants with international aspirations should also think globally. Some international business schools and visa authorities still prefer or are more familiar with GMAT scores. For example, in some cases, visa paperwork or financial aid processes may move more smoothly with a GMAT score on file. That said, most top programs worldwide now accept both exams. You should research each program’s stated and implicit preferences before choosing a test. Speak with admissions consultants or current students at your target schools to gather insights into how scores are interpreted within the admissions process.

One frequently overlooked aspect is the psychological component. Some students simply feel more at ease with one test over the other. That comfort level can translate into significant performance gains. Anxiety, pacing issues, and fatigue can undermine performance even when a student knows the content is cold. If you’ve taken practice tests and consistently feel more focused, calm, and capable on one test, that’s a strong signal. It’s better to score in the 90th percentile on the GRE than to fight the GMAT for a 70th percentile score—admissions officers will recognize which test allowed you to shine.

Finally, consider the overall role of the exam in your application. While test scores are important, they are only one part of a broader picture. A strong score can help balance a low GPA, make up for a career gap, or compensate for weaker extracurriculars. Conversely, if you have a highly distinctive profile, strong leadership experience, and excellent essays, a good-but-not-great score might still be enough. In that sense, the exam should be viewed not as an obstacle but as a strategic tool—one that helps shape the admissions committee’s understanding of your readiness and potential.

The GMAT Focus and the shorter GRE are both thoughtful updates to their respective testing ecosystems. They are easier to prepare for, more accessible to diverse applicants, and better aligned with the evolving demands of business education. Your goal as an applicant is to evaluate each through the lens of your unique strengths, goals, and timeline. Don’t just ask, “Which test is easier?” Instead, ask, “Which test makes me look more like the candidate I want to present to admissions?” Answering that question honestly can make all the difference as you shape your MBA journey.

Final Thoughts

The introduction of the GMAT Focus Edition and the redesigned shorter GRE marks a pivotal shift in the landscape of MBA admissions testing. Both tests have been deliberately shortened, not just to reduce testing fatigue but to better reflect the skills most relevant to graduate education and today’s professional demands. These changes signal a larger movement in graduate admissions toward efficiency, relevance, and inclusivity.

For applicants, this evolution is a clear opportunity. The GMAT Focus Edition allows candidates to lean into their strengths, particularly in data interpretation and analytical reasoning, while trimming content that once deterred many, such as grammar-heavy sentence correction and essay writing. Its modern features, like the ability to review and change answers, show that GMAC has listened to test-taker feedback and prioritized usability. For those aiming for careers in consulting, finance, and analytics-heavy industries, the GMAT Focus may even provide a closer fit to future coursework and job tasks.

Meanwhile, the shorter GRE retains its broad applicability across graduate disciplines while significantly reducing test-day exhaustion. This update enhances accessibility without sacrificing the intellectual rigor that top programs expect. For MBA applicants with nontraditional backgrounds, strong verbal reasoning, or plans to pursue joint degrees, the GRE remains a viable and flexible option. Its stability in content also makes it easier to prepare for in a self-paced or budget-conscious way.

As a candidate, your role is not to figure out which test is universally “better” but which test better highlights your personal strengths and fits your story. The decision should align with your educational background, career aspirations, and testing style. Whether you feel more at ease with vocabulary and reading comprehension or with charts and quantitative analysis, there’s now a version of each exam that prioritizes what matters most to you.

Ultimately, neither the GMAT nor the GRE should define your candidacy—but both can enhance it. A strong test score might not guarantee admission, but it strengthens your profile and can help compensate for weaknesses elsewhere. Conversely, a mediocre score doesn’t disqualify you if the rest of your application—your resume, essays, recommendations, and interviews—is compelling and coherent.

Your MBA application is a narrative, and the test score is one chapter in a larger story. As you evaluate your testing options, remember that the real goal is not just to gain admission but to position yourself for long-term academic and professional success. The right test, taken with the right mindset, can provide clarity and momentum. Use that opportunity wisely, and you’ll be better equipped to navigate not only admissions but the challenges and opportunities of business school itself.

If you need help choosing the best test or crafting a prep strategy tailored to your profile, don’t hesitate to seek guidance. The right advice at the right time can make a lasting difference.