Among current dynamics of higher education, it is found the internationalization of universities, phenomenon that demands lots of information at decision making moments for a specific institution, when it is related to satisfying the needs for knowledge that society expects. This context has transformed itself into fertile ground for proliferation of university rankings, instruments that from a arithmomorphic position, intend to measure certain functions that these educational entities execute. Despite the questionable methodological construction, the homogenizer effect that they grant institutions, and the simplification that they make of reality, these measurements make possible information transparency and the development accountability actions from the respective stakeholders. In light of the exposed, this paper has made its main objective to analyze the different methodologies used by three of the main world university rankings by the year 2019 (Academic Ranking of World Universities-ARWU; Times Higher Education World University Rankings-THE; QS World University Rankings-QS), recognizing the dimensions and indicators, percentage weights and information sources that they employ, all in all through secondary sources of information. The study allowed to verify that the analyzed rankings strongly focused themselves on investigation on the institutions and the impact generated through citations on one side and the reputation of universities on the other. Lastly, it was detected that there is no uniformity in the means to recollect data: ARWU gathers objective information from verifiable platforms while THE and QS present a methodological mix through the use of perception surveys.