2026 NCAA Division I Women’s Swimming and Diving Championships
- Wednesday, March 18 – Saturday, March 21, 2026
- McAuley Aquatic Center, Atlanta, GA
- Defending Champions: Virginia (5x)
- Championship Central
- Preview Index
- Psych Sheet
- Live Stream
- Live Results
- Live Recaps
The 2026 Women’s NCAA Division I Swimming and Diving Championships are underway in Atlanta, Georgia. As we’ve done in previous years, we wanted to take a look at how teams have performed in recent years compared to their seeding. This is just one way to look at the performances of various teams, but the data can be pretty interesting.
Before we get into the trends, here is a reminder of the seeded scoring based on the psych sheet for this year’s meet:
SCORED PSYCH SHEETS
| Rank | Team | Total | Individual | Relay | Scoring Individuals |
Scoring Relays
|
| 1 | Virginia | 569.5 | 369.5 | 200 | 32 | 5 |
| 2 | Michigan | 334.5 | 178.5 | 156 | 16 | 5 |
| 3 | Stanford | 326.5 | 176.5 | 150 | 15 | 5 |
| 4 | Texas | 295.5 | 188.5 | 107 | 19 | 5 |
| 5 | California | 286 | 150 | 136 | 18 | 5 |
| 6 | Tennessee | 279 | 151 | 128 | 12 | 5 |
| 7 | Louisville | 255.5 | 120.5 | 135 | 11 | 5 |
| 8 | Indiana | 228.5 | 114.5 | 114 | 9 | 5 |
| 9 | NC State | 220 | 116 | 104 | 10 | 5 |
| 10 | Alabama | 89 | 21 | 68 | 5 | 4 |
| 11 | Ohio State | 84.5 | 50.5 | 34 | 8 | 5 |
| 12 | Florida | 83.5 | 65.5 | 18 | 8 | 2 |
| 13 | USC | 75.5 | 39.5 | 36 | 7 | 3 |
| 14 | Wisconsin | 72 | 36 | 36 | 4 | 4 |
| 15 | Georgia | 67 | 45 | 22 | 4 | 1 |
| 16 | Duke | 56.5 | 46.5 | 10 | 6 | 1 |
| 17 | LSU | 50 | 12 | 38 | 4 | 3 |
| 18 | Pitt | 34 | 28 | 6 | 3 | 2 |
| 19 | UCLA | 29 | 19 | 10 | 3 | 2 |
| 20 | Auburn | 20 | 4 | 16 | 1 | 2 |
| 21 | Fresno State | 18 | 18 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| 22 | Nebraska | 15 | 15 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| 23 | Arizona | 12 | 2 | 10 | 1 | 1 |
| 24 | Notre Dame | 11 | 11 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| 25 | VA Tech | 9 | 3 | 6 | 1 | 1 |
| 25 | Cincinnati | 9 | 9 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| 27 | Washington State | 6 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| 28 | UNC | 5 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| 29 | Nevada | 4.5 | 4.5 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| 30 | Arizona State | 4 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 1 |
| 30 | Northwestern | 4 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| 32 | Penn | 3 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| 33 | Princeton | 2.5 | 2.5 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| 34 | Brown | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 |
| 34 | Florida State | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 |
| 34 | South Carolina | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Below, you’ll find a table showing the difference between actual score versus seeded score for each of the last 3 years, along with the average of those 3 years of differences.
| Team | Average (Last 3 Years) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
| Indiana | 44.17 | 56.5 | 29 | 47 |
| Virginia | 36.83 | 4 | 40 | 66.5 |
| Stanford | 31.83 | 70 | 36.5 | -11 |
| Wisconsin | 26.00 | 37 | 11 | 30 |
| Louisville | 18.67 | 29.5 | 28 | -1.5 |
| Duke | 9.00 | -13 | 36 | 4 |
| Northwestern | 8.00 | 0 | 12 | 12 |
| Florida State | 6.00 | 7 | 1 | 10 |
| Texas A&M | 4.17 | 5 | 7.5 | 0 |
| Arkansas | 3.00 | 0 | 3 | 6 |
| Virginia Tech | 2.83 | -13.5 | -1 | 23 |
| Akron | 1.67 | 2 | 3 | 0 |
| Minnesota | 1.17 | -3.5 | 5 | 2 |
| Arizona | -0.67 | 2 | -4 | 0 |
| Arizona State | -0.83 | 37.5 | -36 | -4 |
| UNC | -1.33 | -20.5 | 11.5 | 5 |
| USC | -1.83 | 15 | -33.5 | 13 |
| Auburn | -5.00 | -14 | 1 | -2 |
| Penn | -6.33 | 0 | -7 | -12 |
| California | -8.00 | 16 | -48 | 8 |
| Michigan | -9.33 | -14.5 | 17.5 | -31 |
| Florida | -12.50 | -23 | -14.5 | 0 |
| Georgia | -14.17 | -8.5 | -26 | -8 |
| Ohio State | -14.50 | -10 | -15.5 | -18 |
| LSU | -16.33 | -8 | -6 | -35 |
| Alabama | -22.00 | -34.5 | -9 | -22.5 |
| Tennessee | -31.67 | -74.50 | -23 | 2.5 |
| Texas | -37.67 | -88.5 | -5.5 | -19 |
| NC State | -37.67 | -31 | -30 | -52 |
Some things jump out right away. At the top, Indiana has been performing at their very best at NCAAs over the past few years. Their worst difference over the past 3 years was the +29 they went versus seed in 2024. Last year was a high water mark for the Hoosiers, marking their highest finish in program history, along with their highest score in program history. Fittingly, last year was also their best performance versus their seed in recent memory.
Arguably even more interestingly, Virginia has the 2nd highest average over the past 3 years. The reason that’s interesting is because Virginia comes into the NCAA Championships seeded very highly. Due to that, they have far more room to slip versus their seed than to climb. Even so, they’ve consistently managed to outperform their seeding, and by a lot.
Stanford is another team that’s doing a great job of peaking at NCAAs. Over the past 3 years, the Cardinal is averaging nearly +32 points versus their seeded.
On the flip side, there are some teams that are slipping from their seeding regularly. Texas and NC State are tied for the worst average over the past 3 years, both having slipped by 37.67 points on average. For Texas, that average is largely due to a particularly rough slip last year, where she underperformed their seeded score by 88.5 points.
Tennessee is in a similar boat to Texas. Their average of -31.67 is largely due to their 74.5 point slip last year.
Didn’t realize that about NC State
Texas doing a good job reversing the trend this year so far. NCSU living up to their reputation so far. Giggle
WTH!! Happened to Tennessee and Texas last year! I don’t remember it being that bad!!
ASU milers looking like Sun Devil Fans should wait until next week to tune in…
No evidence here, just my own opinion, I feel like men in general drop time at championship meets while women are more consistent year round.
And how do Athletic Director incentives play into this?
For the top finishing schools, many ADs generally get a % increase of their base salary as bonus even for swimming teams.