[目的/意义] 明确世界标准下“双一流”建设高校与真正一流大学的差距，为“双一流”建设提供思路和借鉴。[方法/过程]基于大学排名的评价体系，以大学群体为研究对象，从人才培育、科学研究、社会效益三大方面将我国36所“双一流”建设高校与世界5个典型的一流大学群体进行全面的对比分析，揭示我国“双一流”建设过程中的优劣势。[结果/结论]分析结果显示，36所“双一流”建设高校在绝对指标上的各项值均高于且远高于6个大学群体的平均值，但在相对指标上的各项值均低于且远低于6个大学群体的平均值。在人才培养方面反映为我国的师资力量大，但生师比偏高，高层次人才及师资配置有待提升；在科学研究方面反映为我国科研产出高，但论文质量不高，尤其是优秀成果较少；在国际化方面反映为我国的国际影响力和国际化程度不够，国际化进程和国际交流需进一步加强。

[Purpose / significance] Compare the gap between "double first-class" universities and truly first-class universities under the world standards, and provide ideas and suggestions for the "double first-class" construction. [Method / process] Based on the evaluation system of the world university rankings, taking the university group as the research object, a comprehensive comparative analysis was made between 36 “double first-class” universities in China and five typical first-class university groups in the world from the aspects of talent cultivation, scientific research, and social benefits. [Results / conclusion] The analysis results show that the values of the absolute indicators of the 36 “double-class” universities are higher than and far higher than the average of the 6 university groups, but the values of the relative indicators are all below and well below the average of the 6 university groups. In terms of talent cultivation, it is reflected that DC36 has a large number of faculty, but the faculty structure is unreasonable, and high-level talents and faculty allocation need to be improved. In terms of scientific research, it is reflected that DC36 has high scientific research output, but the quality of the paper is not high, especially the outstanding achievements are relatively few. In terms of social benefits, DC 36's international influence and the internationalization degree are not enough, the internationalization process and international exchanges need to be further strengthened.