UPES M.Sc Admissions 2026
Last Date to Apply: 25th Feb | Ranked #45 Among Universities in India by NIRF | 1950+ Students Placed 91% Placement, 800+ Recruiters
IIT JAM Exam Analysis 2026: The IIT JAM 2026 examination will be conducted by the Indian Institutes of Technology for admission to postgraduate science programmes. IIT JAM 2026 Exam Analysis has been updated on Careers360 after the examination on February 15, 2026. The detailed analysis will help students understand the overall difficulty level, the section-wise distribution of questions, and the important topics covered in the paper.
This Story also Contains
The IIT JAM 2026 exam will be conducted in computer-based mode for admission to MSc, MS, and Integrated PhD programmes across participating IITs, and the IIT JAM results are expected to be announced on March 20, 2026. On this page, Careers360 will also provide insights from previous years to help candidates compare trends and assess their performance effectively. The purpose of this analysis is to help candidates evaluate their performance and understand how the paper compares with previous years.
IIT JAM 2026 Exam Analysis is available now as the examination has been concluded on February 15, 2026. The morning session ended at 12:30 pm, while the afternoon session concluded at 5:30 pm. Since the respective sessions are over, a detailed analysis is prepared based on student feedback and expert review. The analysis covers the overall difficulty level of the paper, section-wise distribution of questions across MCQs, MSQs, and NATs, topic-wise weightage, and the nature of numerical and conceptual questions asked. It also provides an initial indication of expected cut-off trends based on the paper’s difficulty and performance patterns. This helps candidates evaluate their attempts realistically and understand how the 2026 paper compares with previous years.
The overall difficulty level of the Mathematics paper was moderate to difficult. While a section of candidates reported the paper as manageable, a larger share felt it was lengthy, with Part C emerging as the most challenging section. Time pressure played a significant role, particularly for candidates who struggled with integration-heavy problems.
Compared to previous years, the paper showed a shift in emphasis. Questions from applied mathematics increased, while those from real analysis were fewer. This change influenced both perceived difficulty and score distribution.
Topic-wise Analysis
3 questions appeared.
These were largely easy and standard, involving familiar counting techniques.
Despite being conceptually simple, they required careful reading to avoid logical errors.
3 questions were reported.
Difficulty level was moderate, mostly direct applications of binomial identities.
This section acted as a reliable scoring area.
Group theory featured prominently.
Questions were reported as easy to moderate, focusing on basic properties rather than abstract constructions.
Candidates with clear conceptual foundations found this section comfortable.
Questions from integration were consistently described as tough.
At least one definite integration problem required non-trivial manipulation.
This section significantly contributed to the paper feeling lengthy and demanding.
Widely regarded as too easy.
Questions involved direct application of standard solution methods.
These served as confidence boosters, especially in contrast to integration.
Questions from this topic were present and described as lengthy or “essay-type”, requiring multi-step reasoning.
Though not conceptually hard, they were time-consuming, particularly in Part C.
1 to 2 questions appeared.
These were easy, involving basic limits or continuity-related ideas.
Well-prepared candidates could solve them quickly.
1 question from matrices and 1 from idempotent matrices were reported.
Both were concept-based and straightforward, testing theoretical understanding rather than computation.
A question involving infinite solutions, requiring determination of parameters (such as aaa and bbb), appeared.
This tested rank conditions and consistency, aligning well with JAM standards.
A radius of curvature question was included.
This was standard but required accurate differentiation and formula recall.
No questions from series or convergence were reported.
Overall, real analysis had fewer questions than usual, marking a notable deviation from earlier trends.
Limited presence, but at least one question was indicated by student feedback.
Responses from students reflected mixed reactions. Some candidates felt the paper was easier after completion, while others maintained that it was overall tough, primarily due to length and integration-heavy sections. A common observation was that easy algebra and ODE questions balanced tougher calculus problems, leading to a paper that was selective but fair. The IIT JAM Mathematics 2026 paper emphasised applied mathematics, algebra, and calculus, with reduced focus on real analysis and series. Success depended less on memorisation and more on conceptual clarity, speed, and endurance, particularly in Part C. Candidates strong in algebra and differential equations gained an advantage, while integration remained the key differentiator.
Overall difficulty was easy to moderate
Paper felt lengthy to many students
Questions were mostly direct, but time-consuming
MCQs had low sureness, as reported by some candidates
Physical Chemistry
Considered difficult and lengthy
Many students attempted around 11 questions from this section
Questions were direct and formula-based, but calculations were long
Topics asked:
First-order kinetics
Quantum chemistry
LMCT energy
Physical chemistry acted as a rank-determining section
Inorganic Chemistry
Difficulty level was easy to moderate
Mostly conceptual and theory-based questions
Topics asked:
BF₃ structure
Coordination chemistry
Fe₃O₄ (oxidation state and coordination related)
P₄O₈ (POP bond related)
Diborane reaction
Bond angle questions
Inorganic chemistry was scoring for well-prepared students
Organic Chemistry
Difficulty level ranged from moderate to tough
Fewer direct reactions, more application-based questions
Topics reported:
Terpene-related question
Organic chemistry was less scoring compared to inorganic
More Observations
Quantum chemistry question was confirmed
Coordination chemistry had clear presence
Applied and physical concepts dominated more than organic
Compared to last year, some students felt the paper was tougher
Easy-looking paper, but time management was crucial
Physical chemistry decided the final score spread
Inorganic chemistry provided balance and scoring opportunities
Organic chemistry required careful thought, not guesswork
Overall, the Biotechnology paper was easy to moderate, with many students feeling comfortable while attempting the paper, though confidence was reduced in MSQ-type questions.
MSQ questions were hard, as reported by multiple students, mainly due to close options and the need for exact conceptual clarity rather than guesswork.
Numerical-type questions were present, including a question where the number of protons had to be calculated, which required careful interpretation of given data.
A cell geometry question appeared, where cell shape and dimensions were given and students were asked to calculate cell surface area, combining biology with basic mathematical application.
Interdisciplinary questions involving Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics were difficult, especially for students with weaker numerical backgrounds.
A question from evolution, specifically the Founder Effect, was asked, testing conceptual understanding of population genetics.
A trypsin-related question appeared, focusing on enzyme function and biological role.
From bioinformatics, a question related to local alignment was asked, indicating the continued importance of computational biology concepts.
Vitamin-related questions were present, linking nutrition with physiology and deficiency concepts.
A question from brain physiology, specifically related to glial cells, was asked, testing knowledge of nervous system support cells.
Plant hormones were tested, indicating coverage from plant physiology and regulatory mechanisms.
Questions from the excretory system appeared, covering basic human physiology concepts.
Overall, the paper emphasised basic biology, physiology, and applied concepts, rather than deep molecular mechanisms.
Students reported that while Section A felt manageable, accuracy dropped in later sections due to MSQ difficulty and mixed-discipline numericals.
The paper rewarded candidates with strong conceptual basics in biology, along with the ability to handle simple calculations and interdisciplinary thinking.
Time management was less of an issue compared to Maths and Chemistry, but careful reading of MSQs was essential to avoid negative marking.
Overall Physics paper was tough, and many students found it more difficult compared to other subjects, mainly due to conceptual depth and numerical intensity.
NAT (Numerical Answer Type) questions were tough, requiring precise calculations and strong conceptual understanding, with little room for approximation.
Modern Physics had higher weightage and was difficult, making it one of the most challenging areas in the paper.
Quantum Physics questions were asked, including conceptual and numerical problems, and some students felt these were time-consuming.
Two questions came from LCR circuits, involving circuit analysis and application of resonance concepts.
Thermodynamics was comparatively easy, and around 4–5 questions were asked, making it one of the more scoring sections in Physics.
Optics was tough, with questions requiring careful interpretation rather than direct formula application.
A polarisation question appeared from optics, testing conceptual clarity.
A DC-related question came from quantum context, combining classical and modern physics ideas.
Coordinate system–based questions were asked, involving vector analysis and spatial reasoning.
A transistor question appeared, indicating the presence of basic semiconductor device concepts.
Electronics had a good number of questions, making it an important section for scoring if fundamentals were clear.
A Zener diode question was asked, focusing on its characteristics and application.
An opaque-related question appeared, likely linked to optics or material properties.
Overall, the Physics paper tested conceptual understanding, numerical accuracy, and stamina, with fewer direct or formula-based questions.
Students with strong preparation in modern physics, electronics, and thermodynamics had an advantage, while optics and NAT sections proved to be rank differentiators.
Time management and careful calculation were critical, especially in NAT and quantum-related problems.
Based on the difficulty level and overall performance trends, expected cut-off ranges for various subjects and categories will be shared for IIT JAM 2026 once sufficient data is available. These estimates will be indicative and subject to revision after the official results are announced. Based on the analysis of the IIT JAM 2024 and 2025 examinations, we have identified the overall difficulty patterns and observed shifts across major subjects. Accordingly, the table below presents a simplified projection of expected difficulty levels and cut-off trends for IIT JAM 2026.
Subject | 2024 Difficulty | 2025 Difficulty | Expected 2026 Difficulty | Expected 2026 Cut-off |
Mathematics (MA) | Moderate | Slightly Easier (but lengthy) | Moderate | Slight Increase |
Physics (PH) | Moderate | Moderate to Difficult | Moderate to Difficult | Slight Decrease / Stable |
Chemistry (CY) | Moderate | Easy to Moderate | Moderate | Stable / Slight Increase |
Geology (GG) | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate | Stable |
Biotechnology (BT) | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate | Stable |
Mathematical Statistics (MS) | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate | Stable |
Economics (EN) | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate | Stable |
A detailed section-wise analysis will be uploaded shortly after the exam. This will help candidates understand how each part of the paper performed in terms of difficulty and question distribution.
Memory-based questions and solutions will be uploaded soon.
Candidates will be able to access recalled questions shared by test-takers, along with step-by-step solutions prepared by subject experts.
The IIT JAM 2026 memory-based question paper with solutions PDF will be made available here after the exam. This resource will help candidates:
Review question formats and difficulty
Cross-check attempted answers
Understand solution approaches
Prepare effectively for future JAM attempts
Title | Download Link |
IIT JAM 2026 Memory-Based Question Paper & Exam Analysis PDF | To be Updated |
The IIT JAM Mathematics examination was conducted during the forenoon session of the IIT JAM exam schedule on February 2nd. The IIT JAM 2025 Mathematics paper followed the same format as previous years. Below is the analysis given:
The paper was calculation-heavy, requiring candidates to perform focused calculations throughout the exam.
According to initial feedback, the paper was slightly easier than the previous year but still lengthy and time-consuming.
The paper included a question on relations and functions based on set homomorphism.
A notable change this year was the inclusion of real analysis-based questions in the differential equations section.
Candidates found that the one-mark questions were the easiest.
The IIT JAM Chemistry examination 2025 was of moderate difficulty. The IIT JAM Chemistry syllabus is vast and hence demands an extensive IIT JAM Chemistry preparation. The candidates should refer to the previous year’s IIT JAM Chemistry question papers and indulge in various other mock tests to enhance their preparation.
According to early feedback from candidates, the IIT JAM Chemistry 2025 paper was considered to be of easy to moderate difficulty overall.
The questions from inorganic and organic chemistry were on the easier to moderate side, while the math-related questions were more challenging due to their lengthy calculations. There were about 6-7 such questions.
2 questions were asked about the concept of entropy in the IIT JAM Chemistry 2025 question paper. There was an easy-to-moderate level difficulty question on the topic of surface chemistry.
Inorganic chemistry was easier compared to the other sections of the IIT JAM 2025 question paper.
In the 2025 IIT JAM question paper, there was one question asked on the topic of normalisation constant.
Contrary to the IIT JAM Mathematics and Chemistry examination, the IIT JAM Physics exam was conducted during the afternoon session of the IIT JAM examination from 2:30 PM to 5:30 PM. The difficulty level of the examination was moderate to difficult. The IIT JAM physics syllabus includes topics such as Mechanics and General Properties of Matter, Oscillations, Waves, Optics and Solid State Physics, Devices, Electronics and so on, all of which require extensive IIT JAM Physics practice. The IIT JAM Physics question paper had questions from theory, numerical and application-oriented questions.
The IIT JAM Physics 2025 question paper was more challenging than previous years, with a difficulty level ranging from moderate to difficult. It was also longer, meaning candidates needed to manage their time well to complete all the questions.
The MCQ section was considered the hardest part of the exam, with questions that were more complex and required a deep understanding of the topics to solve.
The paper included two questions on central forces and Kepler's planetary motion, which featured one Numerical Answer Type (NAT) question and one Multiple Select Question (MSQ). In addition to this, there were questions on moments of inertia, magnetic fields, electromagnetic induction, and Maxwell's Theorem, with one or two questions on each topic.
Surprisingly, there were more questions on solid state physics and optics than expected, making these topics stand out in the exam.
Some questions on electromagnetic theory were included, focusing on permittivity and polarization, which tested the candidates' understanding of these concepts.
The paper also covered digital logic and diodes, showing that the exam included a wide range of topics from the syllabus.
All the questions in Section C were formula-based, meaning candidates had to apply specific formulas and concepts to solve the problems, requiring a good understanding of the subject and numerical skills.
The IIT JAM 2024 exam followed a well-structured format, consisting of three sections as per the examination pattern: Section A, which featured Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs); Section B, which included Multiple Select Questions (MSQs); and Section C, which tested candidates with Numerical Answer Type (NAT) questions. Each section had its own unique challenges, testing the candidate’s conceptual knowledge, analytical thinking, and numerical accuracy. Here's a detailed analysis of the exam across different subjects:
The Physics paper covered important topics such as Classical Mechanics, Quantum Mechanics, Electromagnetism, and Mathematical Physics. Among these, Quantum Mechanics and Mathematical Physics received the most attention, making them the primary focus areas. Overall, the difficulty level of the Physics section was moderate. However, Section B stood out as particularly tough due to the presence of multi-concept questions that required candidates to use knowledge from different areas. While Section A was simpler, the candidates needed to pay close attention to detail in Section C, which focused on numerical accuracy.
The Chemistry paper had a broad range of topics, including Organic, Inorganic, Physical, Analytical Chemistry, and Biochemistry. Organic Chemistry focuses heavily on reaction mechanisms and spectroscopy, while Inorganic Chemistry focuses on coordination compounds. Physical Chemistry tested core areas such as thermodynamics and quantum chemistry. The overall difficulty level was again moderate, with Section A being the easiest. However, Section B required a deeper conceptual understanding to tackle the questions effectively, and Section C tested numerical accuracy, making accurate calculations crucial for scoring well.
The Mathematics paper tested candidates on topics like Calculus, Linear Algebra, Real Analysis, Group Theory, and Differential Equations. The primary focus areas were Calculus, Linear Algebra, and Group Theory, which appeared frequently in the questions. The overall difficulty of the Mathematics section was moderate, but Section B was more challenging with its difficult multi-topic questions. Meanwhile, Section C required accuracy in calculations, making it essential for candidates to have a strong grip on numerical problem-solving techniques.
The Geology paper was designed to test candidates' knowledge in topics such as Plate Tectonics, Petrology, Palaeontology, Structural Geology, and Sedimentology. Petrology, Palaeontology, and Structural Geology were the key focus areas, with questions on these topics being more frequent. The paper had a moderate difficulty level, but Section B was observed as the hardest part as per the reviews of the experts. It required candidates to have a strong conceptual foundation and the ability to think critically to solve the questions effectively.
Importance of IIT JAM Exam Analysis
Understanding Difficulty Variations
A detailed analysis helps candidates identify which sections were more demanding and how the paper balanced depth and breadth.
Recognising Recurring Question Patterns
Identifying repeated themes and frequently tested concepts provides insight into the exam’s long-term focus.
Self-Assessment and Performance Review
By comparing personal attempts with expected benchmarks, candidates can realistically assess their chances and plan next steps.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
The detailed exam analysis will be released on the same day of the exam, shortly after each session ends. Morning session analysis is expected after 12:30 pm, and afternoon session analysis after 5:30 pm.
The analysis covers the overall difficulty level, section-wise distribution of MCQs, MSQs, and NATs, topic-wise weightage, and a comparison with previous years’ papers.
Yes. Based on paper difficulty and student feedback, the analysis gives an initial indication of expected cut-off trends, though final cut-offs depend on results and seat availability.
Memory-based questions are useful for rough performance evaluation and understanding question patterns, but they may not exactly match the official paper.
Use it to assess your attempts realistically, identify strong and weak areas, and compare your performance with expected benchmarks before results are announced.
On Question asked by student community
Hello Nisha. No IIT JAM and NEET are not the same level the reason is quite simple.
NEET is an exam for students after class 12th who want to become doctor. The questions are asked only from the class 11th and 12th syllabus of physics, chemistry and biology. The concepts
Hello,
Your exam result will still be generated after you take the IIT JAM exam .
But if you do not submit a valid EWS certificate , then:
Your EWS category benefit will be cancelled .
Your result may be treated as General category .
At the admission stage ,
Hello,
If your IIT JAM status shows “Under Scrutiny: Defect Rectification Done”, it means your correction is submitted and under review. Keep checking your portal, once verified, it’ll change to “Accepted” or “Found Defective.” Updates usually appear within 2–3 days before the portal closes.
Hope you understand.
For IIT JAM BIOTECHNOLOGY EXAMINATION the 4 subjects are PHYSICS, CHEMISTRY, MATHEMATICS AND BIOLOGY and the candidate must be graduated with other criteria. Nowhere in the eligibilities it is needed to have mathematics in +2 level.
You can check out the other eligibility in the brochure given below by Careers360.
Hello dear candidate ,
JAM exam is conducting in english only , no hindi option is available in this exam so there is no choice to giving the IIT JAM exam in Hindi , you must have to prepare in english for IIT JAM .
Hope this information is useful
Master's programs in Sustainability Science and Practice; Climate Change Science and Practice; Urban Economic and Infrastructure Development; Human Development Policy and Practice
NAAC A+ Accredited | Among top 2% Universities Globally (QS World University Rankings 2026)
Highest CTC 30 LPA | #9 in Management Category by Times B-School | Merit-Based Scholarship Upto - 50 Crores
Among top 100 Universities Globally in the Times Higher Education (THE) Interdisciplinary Science Rankings 2026
Last Date to Apply: 25th Feb | Ranked #45 Among Universities in India by NIRF | 1950+ Students Placed 91% Placement, 800+ Recruiters
MSc Finance and MSc International Management Admissions 2026 Now Open | Ranked Among the Top 100 Universities in the World by QS World University Rankings 2025 | Early Round 2 Applications Deadline: 29th Jan’26