The value in variance: how smarter UK-domestic PGT fee-setting strategies unlock revenue

As financial pressures mount across the UK higher education sector, universities are re-examining their tuition fee strategies - particularly where they have the most autonomy to act. This article explores why a more data-driven, market-aware approach to domestic postgraduate taught (PGT) fee-setting could hold the key to unlocking sustainable revenue growth. 

Universities across the UK are under unprecedented financial pressure. While the modest £285 uplift to domestic undergraduate fees – due to take effect in 2025/26 – offers some short-term relief to university finances, it is far from a panacea. Moreover, recent headlines covering tuition fee changes have highlighted how little direct control universities have over domestic undergraduate fee-setting. For longer-term financial resilience, universities must focus on the areas where they can exercise strategic choice over fees.  

Domestic PGT fee-setting is one of the obvious places to start, but nuanced fee-setting at PGT level is far from straightforward. Those tasked with pricing strategy often face limited access to competitor data and limited time or resources to analyse it. And the stakes are high: a misjudged fee which is too high can deter price-sensitive prospective postgraduates, while a fee which is too low will fail to capitalise on the value of high-demand courses. To walk the line between these two extremes, universities need a data-led approach which acknowledges both the limitations and opportunities of PGT fee variance.  

To demonstrate the scale of that variance, the IDP IQ team has taken a closer look at how domestic PGT tuition fees differ across UK nations, subject areas, and institution types.  

Evidence of fee variance is clear at the highest level of domestic PGT fee-setting. Across UK universities, the average domestic PGT fee is £11,588, but there are significant differences across the four nations. England has the highest average fee at £11,919, while Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland sit lower at £10,678, £9,452, and £7,150 respectively. The gap between the most expensive (England) and the least expensive (Northern Ireland) is £4,769 – a 40% difference. 

These top-level comparisons are a useful starting-point in exploring fee variation, but the averages are shaped by critical dynamics such as subject area and institution type, both of which strongly influence fee-setting and will be explored later in this article. Even with these caveats in mind, geographic variance of PGT fees is important because for many prospective PGT students, location powerfully influences university choice.  

Unlike undergraduates, prospective PGT students are typically older and often want to balance PGT study around other responsibilities such as work and family. As such, they are more likely to be tied to their local region, and close proximity to home therefore becomes a pivotal driver of university consideration. As living costs rise and the postgraduate loan fails to cover both tuition fees and living costs, even those without work and family commitments will be under increasing pressure to stay local.  

This has direct implications for PGT fee-setting strategy. A fee that may appear reasonable nationally might not compete well at a local level. Universities must consider how course fees align not just with sector benchmarks, but with the expectations and sensitivities of students in the local recruitment area. This is where understanding variance and smart, data-driven fee-setting can lead to a competitive advantage. 

Fee variance across subject areas further reinforces the need for nuanced pricing strategies. At the higher end, Business and Administrative Studies courses average out at £13,588. On the lower end, subjects such as Travel, Tourism and Hospitality (£10,216), Hair, Beauty and Personal Care (£10,161), and Education and Training (£9,248) sit more than £4,000 lower on average. 

Although Business and Administrative Studies fees on average are higher compared to other subject areas, this does not give universities license to automatically increase fees in these courses. Success hinges on an appropriate fee in combination with advertising, marketing, and messaging which highlights unique selling-points and return on investment, including course outcomes.  

In addition, decisions about the development of new courses – and the optimisation of existing courses – should be grounded in demand analysis. International Business and Administrative Studies PGT enrolment at UK universities may have ballooned in recent years, but HESA data reveals that domestic PGT enrolments in this subject area have been in continual decline for the last four years, falling from 53,710 in 2020/21 to 38,910 in 2023/24. An over-enthusiastic lifting of Business and Administrative Studies course fees in the context of a shrinking audience – albeit one that remains the third-largest out of all subject areas – may risk suppressing demand.  

Again, subject-level averages are useful, but within every broad subject area lies significant variation at course level. Taking Business and Administrative Studies as an example, it is important to note that relatively expensive MBA courses inflate the average fee for this subject area. To understand nuances like this – and to set viable, competitive fees that align with demand – universities need granular, course-level fee data and competitor benchmarking. 

Fee-setting strategy must also consider university profile. On average, Russell Group universities charge more across all subject areas compared to Post-1992 universities, but the extent of that difference varies significantly by subject. 

For Education and Training, Travel, Tourism and Hospitality, Creative Arts and Design, and Agriculture and Related Subjects, the average fee among Post-1992 universities is £9,002, £9,800, £9,310, and £9,208 respectively. Russell Group universities, on average, charge just under £3,000 more for courses across the same subject areas. Students wanting to study courses across subjects including Humanities, Law, Engineering and Technology, Health and Medicine, and Social Studies and Communications can expect to pay between £3,000 and £5,000 more at Russell Group universities compared to Post-1992 universities. And for Computer and Mathematical Science and Business and Administrative Studies, students can expect to pay over £5,000 more at Russell Group universities.  

These disparities inevitably prompt questions about access. For students from lower-income backgrounds, higher-fee courses – particularly at upper-tier universities – may be out of reach. Given the limits of the postgraduate loan outlined earlier, fees that are set too high may be restricting the pool of demand to higher-income considerers only.  

Scholarships can help mitigate this challenge. IDP frequently supports universities in evaluating scholarship strategy within a competitive context, helping to assess aspects such as award type, award coverage, and funding type. 

The scale of variance in domestic PGT fees highlights a critical need for universities to set course fees that balance market demand, course marketing and positioning, and affordability. To achieve this, universities need to move beyond averages and adopt a course-level approach to pricing which leverages the relative flexibility of fee-setting at PGT level.  

The variance in fees between Russell Group and Post-1992 universities also highlights the need to develop fee-setting strategies that reflect provider characteristics, strengths (and weaknesses), and the context of local competition. 

It’s worth noting that this article has focused specifically on the domestic PGT market. Fee variation and pricing sensitivity differ significantly across international markets, where both the opportunities and the risks are even greater. 

As financial pressures intensify and competition for students grows, getting fee-setting right - particularly in the domestic PGT space - is no longer optional; it’s essential. Universities that take a strategic, data-informed approach to pricing will be better positioned to attract the right students, strengthen their market position, and ensure long-term financial sustainability. 

IDP is uniquely positioned to support universities in developing evidence-based, market-sensitive pricing strategies. From tracking top-of-the-funnel demand to portfolio analysis and fee and scholarship benchmarking, IDP helps universities to optimise the recruitment pipeline.  

Contact us for more information on how IDP can support your university. 

Please note that the vast majority of the data shown is for courses which were offered at UK universities in 2024 and 2025.