Qualis Periódicos is the system Brazil’s Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) — the federal agency that evaluates graduate (postgraduate) programmes — has used to classify the journals and other venues where those programmes’ faculty and students publish. A programme’s Qualis profile feeds directly into its four-yearly CAPES evaluation, which in turn affects funding, accreditation, and scholarship allocations. For a Brazilian academic, knowing (or being able to look up) a journal’s Qualis stratum is a routine, practical part of deciding where to submit a paper.
This page explains what the strata mean, who sets them, the single most common misunderstanding about how they work, how to look one up, and the main criticisms of the system. It focuses specifically on Qualis Periódicos itself; for the broader CAPES evaluation process and its scholarship programmes, see CASRAI’s guide to CAPES: Graduate Accreditation, Qualis, and Scholarships.
What Qualis Periódicos actually classifies
Qualis Periódicos is not a ranking of journals in the abstract, the way Journal Impact Factor or CiteScore attempt to be. It is a classification exercise run by CAPES for the specific purpose of evaluating Brazilian graduate programmes (mestrado and doutorado). Every four years, CAPES scores each programme’s research output, and a large part of that scoring depends on where the programme’s faculty and students published — which is where a journal’s Qualis stratum matters.
Because the underlying purpose is programme evaluation rather than journal ranking, Qualis strata are set separately by each of CAPES’s evaluation areas (Ciência da Computação, Direito, Medicina, Educação, and so on — CAPES organises graduate evaluation into dozens of subject areas, each with its own evaluation committee). That single design choice explains most of what confuses people encountering Qualis for the first time.
The strata: which model is in force
Qualis has changed its stratification scheme more than once, and because both the older and newer schemes still appear across Brazilian university documentation, TCC/thesis-writing guidance, and journal websites, it is easy to cite the wrong one. Based on verification against CAPES-linked reporting as of mid-2026:
- Older model (used for classification cycles up to roughly the 2013–2016 quadrennium): an eight-point scale — A1 (highest), A2, B1, B2, B3, B4, B5, and C (effectively unclassified/not scored).
- Model used through the 2021–2024 quadrennium: CAPES released the final classification under this scheme in January 2026. It assigned journals to seven strata — A1, A2, A3, A4, B1, B2, B3 — with A1 the highest and B3 the lowest scored tier. The B4/B5/C tiers from the older model were dropped. CAPES stated this would be the last classification cycle to use letter-graded strata.
- Model for the 2025–2028 quadrennium: CAPES has announced it is replacing the letter-graded strata entirely with a three-tier categorical model — Consolidados (Consolidated), Em processo de consolidação (In process of consolidation), and Não consolidados (Not consolidated) — with each tier further subdivided by the journal’s dominant publication language. As of this writing, the practical mechanics of this new model (exact subdivision criteria, how existing A1–B3 ratings map onto it) had not been fully documented in English-language sources; researchers should treat any A1–B3 rating as reflecting the outgoing model and confirm current status directly through CAPES/Sucupira channels for anything time-sensitive, such as a submission decision tied to funding.
If you see a journal described only as “A1” or “B2” without a quadrennium attached, assume it refers to the 2021–2024 (now closed) cycle unless the source specifies otherwise — that letter-graded system is what nearly all existing Qualis documentation, journal-website badges, and CV templates still reference.
The most common misunderstanding: the same journal, different strata
Because classification happens per evaluation area rather than as one master list, a single journal can hold a different Qualis stratum in each area that reviews it. A multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary journal that publishes both computer science and business papers, for example, is evaluated separately by the Ciência da Computação committee and the Administração committee, and there is no requirement that the two agree. One area might rate it A2; another might rate it B1, or not classify it at all.
This trips up a lot of people who search for “the” Qualis rating of a journal and expect a single number. It also means that where you are enrolled — which evaluation area your graduate programme sits in — determines which stratum actually counts toward your programme’s evaluation, even if the journal displays a different, more flattering rating elsewhere.
Who sets the classification
Classification is carried out by the evaluation committee for each of CAPES’s subject areas (área de avaliação), following criteria CAPES defines centrally but that committees apply with some area-specific discretion — factors commonly cited include a journal’s indexing (in databases such as Scopus or Web of Science), regularity of publication, editorial board composition, and the volume/diversity of contributing institutions. Because this is a committee process repeated across dozens of separate areas, the exact weighting of criteria is not uniform across fields, which is itself one of the system’s recurring criticisms (see below).
How to look up a journal’s Qualis stratum
Qualis ratings are published and searchable through Plataforma Sucupira, CAPES’s system of record for graduate-programme evaluation data, via its Qualis/WebQualis consultation tool. To look one up, you generally need: the journal’s title or ISSN, and the evaluation area you want to check it against (since, as above, the same journal can return different results depending on the area selected). There is no single area-agnostic “Qualis score” field to search by default — you choose the area first.
Because Plataforma Sucupira is a large, multi-purpose system covering far more than Qualis alone, CASRAI covers it as its own topic separately; this guide only covers the lookup step relevant to Qualis itself.
Why it matters beyond an individual paper
For an individual researcher, Qualis strata mainly influence journal choice: publishing in a higher-stratum venue for your area contributes more favourably to your graduate programme’s next evaluation. For a graduate programme as a whole, the aggregate Qualis profile of its faculty’s and students’ publications is one input CAPES uses to score and accredit the programme every four years — which affects the programme’s standing, and in turn scholarship and funding allocations tied to that standing (see CASRAI’s broader guide to CAPES accreditation and scholarships for how programme evaluation and funding connect). For co-authors outside Brazil collaborating with Brazilian researchers, understanding that a colleague may be weighing Qualis stratum alongside (or above) impact factor when choosing where to submit explains a dynamic that otherwise looks like an unexplained journal preference.
Main criticisms of the system
Qualis has been the subject of sustained academic debate in Brazil, with critiques converging on a few recurring points:
- Area fragmentation produces inconsistent standards. Because dozens of separate committees apply broadly similar criteria with area-specific discretion, comparable journals in different fields do not necessarily receive comparable treatment, and cross-area comparisons of “a B1 journal” are unreliable.
- Incentive effects on publication behaviour. Because programme evaluation rewards output in higher-stratum venues, critics argue Qualis can distort where and how researchers choose to publish — sometimes prioritising stratum over fit, audience, or open-access considerations — a version of a criticism also made of impact-factor-driven publishing incentives generally.
- Lag and instability across cycles. Because classification is periodic and tied to a four-year evaluation cycle, a journal’s rating can be out of date for a year or more relative to its current editorial quality, and the scheme itself has changed more than once (as this page’s strata section describes), which complicates longitudinal comparison of CVs and programme records.
- Bias toward established/indexed venues. Criteria weighted toward indexing in major international databases can disadvantage newer, regional, or non-English-language journals, even where the applying area intends to support Brazilian and Portuguese-language scholarship.
Frequently asked questions
Is Qualis the same as a journal’s impact factor?
No. Impact factor (and similar citation metrics such as CiteScore) is calculated by commercial indexing services from citation counts. Qualis is a classification CAPES applies specifically for evaluating Brazilian graduate programmes, and while indexing/impact data is often one input a committee considers, the resulting stratum is a CAPES/area-committee judgment, not a citation metric itself.
Can a journal have no Qualis classification at all?
Yes. A journal not reviewed or not classified by a given area’s committee simply has no rating in that area — this is distinct from the historical “C” tier under the older model, which functioned as an explicit lowest/unclassified category.
Does Qualis apply to conferences as well as journals?
Some CAPES evaluation areas — computer science prominently among them, where peer-reviewed conference proceedings carry significant weight — also classify conference proceedings alongside journals under the same general Qualis framework, though the criteria and relative weight given to conferences versus journals vary by area.
Where is the authoritative, current source for a specific journal’s rating?
Directly through CAPES’s Plataforma Sucupira / WebQualis consultation tool, filtered to the correct evaluation area and classification cycle. Because the underlying model changed for the 2025–2028 quadrennium, always check which cycle a rating you’re relying on refers to.
