SciFig
Journals··Updated

Nature Impact Factor 2026: 56.1

Nature's impact factor is 56.1, with a five-year JIF of 56.7. What the number covers, why a 2026 search returns a 2025 value, and how Nature compares.

Alex Carter
Alex Carter
Founder, SciFig

Nature's impact factor is 56.1, with a five-year impact factor of 56.7.

Both figures are published by Nature Portfolio on the journal's own metrics page and carry the year label 2025. The underlying metric is Clarivate's Journal Impact Factor, released through the 2026 Journal Citation Reports.

This page is about Nature itself — the weekly journal at nature.com/nature, ISSN 0028-0836 (print) and 1476-4687 (online). It is not about Nature Communications, Scientific Reports, or any other Nature Portfolio title. Those are separate journals with separate metrics, and the comparison further down explains how they relate.

The number is easy to look up. What it costs to act on it — an acceptance rate of about 8%, and a scientific figure standard that changes between first submission and production — is the part worth reading.

What is Nature's impact factor?

56.1, labelled 2025, with a five-year Journal Impact Factor of 56.7.

Nature Portfolio states both on the journal's own metrics page. The metric is Clarivate's, and the definition restated on that page is Clarivate's too: the Journal Impact Factor is "all citations to the journal in the current JCR year to items published in the previous two years, divided by the total number of scholarly items (these comprise articles, reviews, and proceedings papers) published in the journal in the previous two years."

Two things follow from that definition and matter more than the headline value.

It is a two-year window. The five-year figure (56.7) covers a longer one, and for Nature it sits slightly above the two-year figure rather than below it.
It is a journal average, not a prediction about your paper. The publisher says so directly on the same page, and that caveat is quoted in full further down.

Nature at a glance

Journal Impact Factor56.1 (2025)
5-year Journal Impact Factor56.7 (2025)
Immediacy Index13.1 (2025)
Eigenfactor® Score0.97835 (2025)
Article Influence Score22.642 (2025)
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP)10.607 (2025)
SCImago Journal Rank (SJR)19.713 (2025)
ISSN0028-0836 (print) · 1476-4687 (online)
PublisherNature Portfolio (Springer Nature)
Web of ScienceScience Citation Index Expanded, plus ten additional indexes
Access modelHybrid — subscription by default, Gold Open Access optional
APC (Gold OA)£9,390.00 / $12,850.00 / €10,850.00
Acceptance rateabout 8% of submitted manuscripts
Submission to first editorial decision8 days (median)
Submission to acceptance321 days (median)
Downloads 2025205,603,435
Altmetric mentions 2025956,164

All seven citation metrics, the two speed figures and the usage counts are published by Nature Portfolio on the journal metrics page and carry the 2025 label. The impact factors originate with Clarivate's Journal Citation Reports, 2026 release.

You searched 2026 — why this is the 2025 JIF

This trips up more people than it should. Impact factors are labelled by the citation year, not by the year you look them up.
What you searchedWhat it meansThe answer
"Nature impact factor 2026"The number available to you in 202656.1, labelled 2025
"Nature impact factor 2025"The same current number56.1
"Nature 2026 JIF"Not published yetReleased in the following annual cycle
Journal Citation Reports releases annually, and the value published in a given year describes citations from the previous year. So the figure you can verify today is the 2025 Journal Impact Factor, released in the 2026 JCR cycle. A page advertising a "2026 impact factor" for any journal is either relabelling the 2025 value or inventing one.

The same offset applies to every metric in the table above — Immediacy Index, Eigenfactor, SNIP and SJR all carry the 2025 label on the publisher's page.

Where this number comes from, and how to check it yourself

The 56.1 and 56.7 above are read from Nature Portfolio's own journal metrics page for Nature, which is where the publisher states them. The metric underneath is Clarivate's Journal Impact Factor, computed from Journal Citation Reports data and released in the 2026 JCR cycle.

To verify it independently:

  1. Open the publisher's journal metrics page. It is public, it is the fastest primary source, and it restates all seven citation metrics with their year labels.
  2. Open Journal Citation Reports if your institution subscribes. JCR is the only place that also gives you category rank, quartile and a year-on-year trend.
  3. Check you are comparing the same citation year. Setting a 2025 JIF against a 2024 JIF from another journal makes the comparison meaningless.

The publisher attaches its own warning to the number, on the same page it publishes it:

"Springer Nature is a signatory of the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA). Because small numbers of highly cited articles can have outsized influence on certain citation measures like the 2-year Journal Impact Factor (JIF)…, Springer Nature believes that these citation measures are not necessarily measures of journal quality, and that authors and readers should consider a range of metrics when evaluating journals to read and publish in."

Next step: what Nature figures have to meet

Two sets of specifications — one for the first submission, a stricter one after acceptance — and the column widths differ between them.

Explore the Tool

Is Nature Q1? Quartile and category rank

Nature is indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection, Science Citation Index Expanded — the index a Journal Impact Factor is computed from. Clarivate's Master Journal List confirms that entry under the publisher name Nature Portfolio, along with ten additional indexes including BIOSIS Previews, three Current Contents editions, Essential Science Indicators, Index Chemicus and Zoological Record.
No quartile is printed here. Quartile and category rank are Journal Citation Reports fields. Nature's own metrics page publishes seven citation metrics and no quartile, and the Master Journal List carries neither JIF nor quartile by design — it confirms indexing and category membership, not values.

What to do instead, which takes about a minute:

  1. Open Journal Citation Reports and search the journal by ISSN — 0028-0836. JCR returns the quartile alongside the category rank it was derived from.
  2. Read the category, not just the letter. A multidisciplinary journal appears in more than one Web of Science category, and the quartile can differ between them. The one that belongs on an evaluation form is the one for the category your assessors use.
  3. If you have no JCR access, your library almost certainly does, and a librarian can pull the entry in the same minute.
A 56.1 is a very high value by the standard of any Web of Science category, so the practical answer to "is Nature Q1" is not in doubt. The reason to go to JCR anyway is that the figure a promotion or grant form wants is the quartile printed for a named category, and that is not something a third-party page can supply for you.

Is Nature's impact factor rising or falling?

The publisher's metrics page states one year at a time: it carries the 2025 values and no history, so there is no year-by-year series here — a trend table assembled from cached pages is exactly the kind of thing that quietly goes wrong. JCR is where the real series lives.

What the current page does tell you about direction:

  • The five-year JIF (56.7) sits above the two-year JIF (56.1). The five-year window contains the same two years plus three older ones. A five-year figure at or above the two-year figure means the older cohorts are still being cited at a comparable rate — citations are not collapsing after year two.
  • The Immediacy Index is 13.1. That measures how quickly papers are cited within their own year of publication, and a value that high says Nature papers are picked up immediately rather than accumulating slowly.
  • Downloads and Altmetric mentions for 2025 — 205,603,435 and 956,164 — describe attention rather than citation, and are on the same page if you need a non-citation signal.

If you want the actual trajectory, Journal Citation Reports plots a JIF trend per journal for subscribers. Failing that, the publisher's metrics page is re-published annually at the same URL, which makes a screenshot once a year the cheapest longitudinal record you can keep for yourself.

For a submission decision, the direction of a 56 is not the variable. The 8% acceptance rate is.

Beyond the headline: SNIP, SJR, and Eigenfactor

Nature Portfolio publishes seven citation metrics on the same page, all carrying the 2025 label. Each answers a different question, and two of them are more useful than the JIF for a submission decision.

Metric2025 valueWhat it actually answers
Journal Impact Factor56.1Average citations per citable item over a two-year window
5-year Journal Impact Factor56.7The same over five years — higher here, so citations keep accruing past year two
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP)10.607Citation rate corrected for field citation habits. The one figure here built to survive a cross-discipline comparison
SCImago Journal Rank (SJR)19.713Citations weighted by the prestige of the citing journal — a citation from a highly cited venue counts for more
Immediacy Index13.1How quickly papers start being cited within their year of publication
Eigenfactor® Score0.97835The journal's share of total citation traffic across the whole database
Article Influence Score22.642Eigenfactor expressed per article; 1.0 is the average article in the database
If you are comparing Nature against a journal in another field, use SNIP. Raw impact factors are not comparable across disciplines because citation habits differ; SNIP is normalised for exactly that. If your question is where the citations come from rather than how many, use SJR.
Eigenfactor and Article Influence are the pair people misread. Eigenfactor is a share of the whole database, so it is small in absolute terms for every journal; Article Influence rescales it per article against a database average of 1.0, which is the form that means something on its own.
Two metrics you will see quoted elsewhere are not on the publisher's page: CiteScore and h-index. Both are computed by third parties over windows that differ between databases, which is why circulating values for the same journal often disagree. If you quote one, name the database and the year with it.

Nature vs Science vs Cell vs Scientific Reports

Most people arriving here are not really asking for a number. They are asking one of two questions: "does this venue count the same?" or "where else could this paper go?"
One ground rule for this section. This guide states metrics only where they have been read from the publisher's own current page, and that has been done here for Nature alone. So no impact factor appears below for any journal other than Nature. What appears instead is the set of things that actually decide where a paper goes — who makes the decision, what the journal selects for, how it is funded, and who publishes it. For any other journal's current figure, its own "journal metrics" or "about" page is the primary source and takes a minute to open.

Is Scientific Reports part of Nature?

No — it is a different journal from the same publisher. Scientific Reports is a Nature Portfolio title, and its own pages say so:

"Scientific Reports is led by the same ethical and editorial policy guidelines as other Nature Portfolio journals to ensure that all the research we publish is scientifically robust, original, and of the highest quality."

Read that sentence carefully, because it is precise about what is shared. Nature Portfolio journals share ethical and editorial policy guidelines — research integrity, image integrity, authorship, AI use. They do not share selection thresholds, and they are editorially independent of one another. A paper in Scientific Reports is a paper in Scientific Reports. It is not a Nature paper, and describing it as one on a CV will be read as an overstatement by anyone in the field.

The same applies to Nature Communications, and to every other title carrying the word Nature in its masthead. Shared policy, shared publisher, separate journals.

This is a difference in purpose, not a ranking. Nature's stated criterion is interest to a broad readership, and by that criterion a methodologically flawless paper with no cross-disciplinary reach is a poor fit — which says nothing whatsoever about its quality. Choosing a venue whose criterion your paper actually meets is a better strategy than choosing the highest number and absorbing an 8% pass rate.

What actually separates Nature from the journals it gets compared with

Nature draws one of these contrasts itself, on its editorial criteria page:

"Nature does not employ an editorial board of senior scientists, nor is it affiliated to a scientific society or institution… The judgement about which papers will interest a broad readership is made by Nature's editors, not its referees."

That sentence is written the way it is because several of the journals people put next to Nature are society-published — Science is published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science — while Cell is published by Cell Press. Where a journal sits on that axis changes who reads your cover letter first and what they are selecting for.

The four axes worth comparing before you commit:

  • Who decides, and against what criterion. At Nature, full-time professional editors decide, and about 8% of submissions are accepted, with most declined without going to referees. Every journal states its own criterion on its own editorial criteria page — read the target journal's, not a summary of it.
  • What you are allowed to show. Nature ties the display item budget to length: a 6-page article carries about 4 modest figures or tables, an 8-page article 5–6, plus up to 10 Extended Data items. A figure-heavy study is treated very differently at journals with a flat cap or none.
  • How it is funded. Nature is a hybrid journal: publish under the traditional subscription route at no charge, or choose Gold Open Access at £9,390.00 / $12,850.00 / €10,850.00. Fully open access journals give you no subscription route to fall back on, which is a materially different funding problem.
  • Where a rejection leads. Nature's own decision letter carries a transfer option: authors can "transfer all manuscript materials, the decision letter and any referee comments to a selection of Springer Nature journals without re-entering submission information." This is the official, and most common, route by which a Nature submission ends up at a sibling journal, and it is worth knowing before you submit rather than after.
For the sibling comparison in detail, the metrics, fees and figure specifications of Nature Communications are set out in the Nature Communications impact factor guide — a separate journal, fully open access, with its own figure specifications that do not match Nature's.

What this number does not tell you

What 56.1 does tell you. Papers in Nature are, on average, cited extraordinarily heavily, and the Immediacy Index of 13.1 says that starts immediately. This is the widest-visibility venue in general science.
What it does not tell you is anything about your paper. Citation distributions in multidisciplinary journals are heavily skewed — a minority of papers earn a large share of the citations, which is precisely the effect the publisher names in its DORA statement. Your citation count will be decided by your field, your topic and your paper.

More practically, the number is silent on the three things that decide your outcome:

  • Whether an editor sends the paper out at all. About 8% of submissions are accepted and "most submissions are declined without being sent out for peer review." That filter is applied by editors, on the criterion of broad interest, before any referee sees your work.
  • How long it takes. A median of 8 days to the first editorial decision, and a median of 321 days from submission to acceptance. Those answer two very different questions, and the gap between them is the part people underestimate.
  • What producing the accepted version costs. Nature runs two different sets of figure requirements, one for the first submission and a stricter one after acceptance — including column widths that differ between the two stages.

Preparing figures for Nature

The requirement most likely to cost you time is not the metric. It is that Nature operates a two-stage figure system, and the numbers change between stages.
At initial submission the journal is deliberately relaxed: "high-resolution image files are not required at initial submission," and text and figures can go in a single PDF or Word file. After acceptance, production wants editable vector artwork with everything on separate layers, text between 5 pt and 7 pt, line weights between 0.25 and 1 pt, and figures built to the production column widths.
Two decisions are worth making correctly from the first draft, because they are the expensive ones to reverse: do not rasterize line art or text, and do not compose at an arbitrary width. Both are cheap at the start and mean rebuilding a figure later.
The full specification — including the three different sets of column widths Nature publishes across its own pages, the file formats its guidance disagrees about, and the Extended Data rules — is in Nature formatting requirements. What binds at which stage is covered in the Nature submission guide.
If your figures already exist and need rebuilding to those widths and line weights, re-exporting them at specification is faster than starting over.

Build to Nature's production specification

Editable vector output with 5–7 pt text and 0.25–1 pt line weights — the two things production cannot fix for you.

Try Free

Should you submit to Nature?

The official framing, quoted in full because it is the single most useful sentence on Nature's editorial criteria page:

"Nature's aim is to publish the best research across a wide range of scientific fields, which means it has to be highly selective. As a result, only about 8% of submitted manuscripts will be accepted for publication. Most submissions are declined without being sent out for peer review."

Submit if:
  • The advance is significant beyond your own field — that, not quality alone, is the stated criterion
  • You can afford a median of 321 days to acceptance in your timeline
  • Your evidence fits roughly 4 display items at 6 pages, or 5–6 at 8 pages, plus up to 10 Extended Data items
  • You are prepared for a fast negative: the median first editorial decision is 8 days, and "authors are usually informed within a week if the paper is not being considered"
Think twice if:
  • The result is important within a specialty but not outside it — the broad-interest filter is applied before review, and a strong field journal reaches your actual readers
  • You are on a deadline that a 321-day median does not survive
  • You need Gold Open Access and have no funding for £9,390.00 / $12,850.00 / €10,850.00 — note that the subscription route carries no APC at all
  • The paper is a Review, Comment or News & Views piece and you specifically need open access: those formats "are not eligible for gold Open Access"
The fast rejection is a feature. Eight days to a decline, with the option to transfer materials and referee comments to another Springer Nature journal, costs far less than a slow maybe. The full process, from presubmission enquiry to APC, is in the Nature submission guide.

Frequently asked questions

Sources

The metrics here come from Nature Portfolio's own journal metrics page for Nature; the acceptance rate, timings and fees from the journal's own author and editorial pages. Reviewed 2026.

The impact factor is Clarivate's, published through Journal Citation Reports; this guide cites the publisher's restatement so the figure can be checked without a JCR subscription. Category rank and quartile are JCR fields and are not printed here.

See our editorial standards for how these guides are researched and corrected.

Recommended next

Related scientific figure resources

Go deeper with the most relevant SciFig pages for this article.

Call to action background

Ready to start?

Publication-ready scientific figures, in minutes

Start Creating Free

Free to start · No credit card required · Built for researchers