<ol>
<li><p>If you added Chicago, Stanford, and MIT to the mix, you could call them CHYMPS. Or SCHYMP. Maybe PHYMSC. None of those are quite as evocative as “HYP” or “HYPS,” but they’re not bad. (If you added Rice, you could call them “SCHRYMP (with Rice).”) </p></li>
<li><p>The fundamental reason why Chicago is unlikely to overtake HYPS in the short run is that their endowments are roughly 3-5 times that of Chicago, both in absolute terms and on a per-student basis. That’s not to say they are anything like 3-5 times better than Chicago, or that they spend 3-5 times more than Chicago on their undergraduate students’ educations. But if you spend any time at one of them and at Chicago, it’s not hard to tell they are wealthier institutions and that some of that wealth trickles down to students in a beneficial way.</p></li>
</ol>