Losing the Edge? International Graduates Still Outperform but for how much longer?

Design reference adapted from Raymond James' Investment Strategy Quarterly (Apr 2023).

Losing the Edge? International Graduates Still Outperform but for how much longer?

As global economies strain under the pressure of technological disruption, demographic shifts, and tightening job markets, one thing is becoming increasingly clear: whilst an overseas education used to almost guarantee stronger employment outcomes for international graduates returning home, that advantage is being slowly eroded. This is due in part to the lack of international graduate outcomes data available to universities, and consequently, a lack of support for international graduates to transition to the workforce back home.

New analysis from the Asia Careers Group (ACG), based on data from over 20,000 international graduates from Australian and UK universities who returned home to China, India, Malaysia, and Singapore since 2015, reveals a mixed picture. In some markets, internationally educated graduates continue to outperform their domestic peers, but the gap is narrowing. This is not because domestic education is catching up—but because international graduates are not always receiving the support they need to transition into meaningful employment at home.

This makes demonstrating the return on investment of an international degree more important than ever. For families across Asia, employability outcomes are paramount in justifying the high cost of overseas study. For universities in Australia, the UK, and other major host countries, international graduate outcomes are not just a marketing tool, they are fast becoming central to institutional sustainability. If international graduates are not securing better jobs, faster, and for longer, the whole value proposition begins to unravel. ACG's cross-referenced data with national labour market statistics provides rare insight into what really happens after graduation and where the system is falling short. 

China: A Reversal and a Resurgence

In China, ACG data shows that internationally educated graduates historically had significantly higher full-time employment outcomes than their domestically educated peers. During the 2000s and early 2010s, overseas-educated Chinese returnees were prized in urban job markets, with top employers valuing foreign credentials, English fluency, and global experience.

Yet this trend faltered just before the pandemic, at a time when outbound Chinese student numbers were at record highs and the domestic economy began to slow. As youth unemployment surged and domestic graduates flooded the market, international returnees lost some of their competitive edge. Returning "Sea Turtles" became a national talking point. The term, derived from the Chinese word "haigui" (海龟), refers to graduates who return to China after studying abroad. Once seen as prized talent with international expertise and high earning potential, their growing numbers began to saturate elite job markets, particularly in Beijing, Shanghai, and Shenzhen. Employers, increasingly focused on local experience and cost efficiency, were no longer automatically prioritising overseas credentials. As more returnees entered an already strained job market, their competitive edge diminished, and "haigui" were no longer guaranteed success. In fact, some faced unemployment or underemployment on their return.  The pandemic marked a historic low point: full-time employment rates for returnees fell below 30%, dipping beneath the national average for the first time.

But the recovery since then has been striking. In 2023–24, nearly 50% of internationally educated Chinese graduates secured full-time jobs within six months, compared to just 30% of their domestically educated peers. Despite rising geopolitical tensions and slowing economic growth, degrees from the UK and Australia remain highly valued. The data confirms what many in the sector have long argued: international study remains one of the few levers Chinese families can pull to secure upward mobility, even in a difficult economic climate.

India: Policy Shocks, Post-Study Work, and a Reversal of Fortunes

In India, ACG data comparing full-time graduate employment outcomes with employability scores from the India Skills Report (ISR) reveals a dynamic picture shaped by UK immigration policy. From 2014 onwards, the employability of Indian graduates returning home declined significantly. This coincided with the revocation of post-study work rights by Prime Minister Theresa May, which denied Indian students the opportunity to gain UK work experience before returning to India. As a result, many struggled to differentiate themselves in a saturated domestic graduate market.

This trend reversed when Boris Johnson reinstated post-study work rights in 2019. By 2023, ACG data showed a clear uplift: nearly 70% of Indian returnees had secured full-time roles within six months of graduation, compared to just 50% of graduates from Indian institutions. The gap had widened sharply in favour of internationally educated candidates, especially those with UK degrees and valuable international experience.

Yet since 2023, the data reveals another inflection point. Employability of Indian returnees has begun to decline once again. Despite the continued availability of the Graduate Route, many graduates are struggling to re-integrate into the Indian workforce—whether returning immediately or after a short period of post-study work abroad. This suggests the need for structured re-entry support, including targeted career advice, in-country employer engagement, and stronger alumni networks to bridge the transition from international education to local employment.

Malaysia: Declining Returns, Except for Those Who Study Abroad

The Malaysian picture is one of a decline in graduate outcomes, whilst very gradual for those who remain within the domestic education system. ACG data from 2010 to 2021 shows a stark drop in full-time employment rates among internationally educated Malaysian graduates, falling from nearly 80% to just over 30%. Meanwhile, Ministry of Education and Khazanah Research Institute (MOE/KRI) data suggests that domestic full-time employment outcomes have remained relatively flat, hovering between 45% and 50%. This narrowing gap is not due to improving domestic prospects—but rather the worsening trajectory for international returnees without targeted support.

However, employment rate alone does not tell the full story. When we look at starting salary data, a different picture emerges. According to the Department of Statistics Malaysia and ACG's own analysis, internationally educated Malaysians—especially those with UK and Australian degrees—continue to command significantly higher salaries than their domestically educated peers. For example, the share of returnees earning over RM6,000 grew substantially between 2010 and 2021, while domestic data from MOE/KRI shows that 65.6% of Malaysian graduates earned below RM2,000 in 2021.

This suggests that while overseas-educated returnees may find it harder to secure immediate employment without local support networks, when they do enter the workforce, they do so in better-paid, more senior, or more internationally connected roles. It reinforces the view that international education still offers upward mobility and income advantage but only if paired with reintegration support to bridge the last mile between graduation and career.

Singapore: Transparency Exposes the Divide

Singapore's data story is unique for its transparency. Ministry of Education graduate employment surveys provide annual outcome data by institution, and Singapore's SkillsFuture movement has helped align academic and employer expectations. Yet ACG data still reveals a meaningful gap between internationally and domestically educated graduates.

Between 2013 and 2023, the full-time permanent employment rate for Singaporean returnees fell from nearly 80% to just over 50%. In contrast, the government's figures for local graduates remained consistently above 75%. At face value, this suggests a disadvantage for international education. But context matters.

Many Singaporeans now study abroad at postgraduate level, often in non-traditional destinations or programmes without clear employer pipelines. They may miss out on structured public sector recruitment or graduate schemes available to local students. And crucially, some never return, skewing domestic data. When they do return, they often face a lack of targeted career support—an integration gap that international universities must urgently address. The employability of returnees in Singapore isn't inherently lower; it's structurally unsupported.

Implications for Universities and Policymakers

Across all four countries, the message is clear: international graduates are still more employable but only when the system around them works. That system includes post-study work options, but more critically, it involves the ability to transition successfully into home-country employment.

For universities, this means going beyond recruitment and retention. It means investing in international graduate outcomes data to understand what happens when students return home. It means forging strategic relationships with the leading employers of their alumni in key source markets, and using that insight to shape course content and career pathways. Crucially, it requires building appropriate, culturally informed careers support for international students planning to return home, including tailored advice, in-country employer connections, and mentoring from successful alumni. Universities must recognise that the true measure of international education is not enrolment figures, but employment outcomes and they must act accordingly.

For policymakers in receiving countries, the responsibility is equally pressing. If international graduates are to remain part of a sustainable higher education strategy, governments must ensure that visa and migration policies align with employability outcomes. That includes maintaining transparent, stable post-study work routes, ensuring compliance regulation doesn't disproportionately penalise genuine students, and incentivising universities to track and support international graduate transitions. Critically, receiving country governments should recognise that international students are not just a revenue stream, but part of a wider global talent pipeline and policy should reflect that long-term strategic value and building soft power.

And for students and families, the message is nuanced but hopeful. An overseas degree still delivers value, but the outcomes are strongest when supported by targeted employability strategies and structured transitions. Without those, the international premium is at risk.

References

1. Asia Careers Group (ACG). Proprietary international graduate outcomes tracking data, 2015–2024.
2. India Skills Report (ISR). Confederation of Indian Industry, Wheebox, and Taggd, various years.
3. Ministry of Education, Malaysia / Khazanah Research Institute (KRI). Graduate Tracer Study and labour market reports, 2010–2021.
4. Department of Statistics Malaysia (DOSM). Monthly and graduate salary distribution reports.
5. Ministry of Education, Singapore. Graduate Employment Survey (GES), 2013–2023.
6. UK Home Office & Migration Advisory Committee. Graduate Route Policy Review, 2024.
7. Chinese Ministry of Education (MoE) and independent Chinese think tank commentary on "Sea Turtles" ("Haigui").