T2 market perception

T2 is T2, and that's not going to change any time soon. The only way that changes is if undergrads and MBAs start choosing non-MBB firms in their cross offers, but MBB has such a strong brand resume recognition that they don't -- you can see how this is cyclical

In terms of the T2s being "ranked", I don't think it makes a ton of sense to do. The T2 strategy firms are smaller than MBB, and typically have niches they're really good in that are worth considering (LEK is good at PE/life sciences, ATK is industry leader in supply chain & a lot of ops type work, etc)

But if you had to rank them, I'd say that according to Fishbowl comments the two that get the most positive and least negative attention are Strategy& and OW. ATK is a well respected spot but isn't talked about a ton in general - stereotype is that it's very ops & supply chain focused but that's obviously not all they do. LEK is sweaty. EY-P strategy is a good spot and they're now making comp more competitive and offering bonuses consistent with being in strategy consulting (IIRC they used to be lower than industry average), but they did also merge a ton of non-strategy transactions advisory work under the banner and there seems to be a difference in experience depending on if part of the proper strategy teams or not

As an undergrad, you should be pursuing MBB + all 5 T2s. If you get an offer at multiple T2s then I'd assess based on (1) comp & comp trajectory over ~3-5 yr period, (2) project mix and how that fits with your career goals, and (3) who you personally clicked with the most / location / intangibles. I don't think there's going to be a totally consistent answer for which firm makes the most sense to pick over which (but again, if you had to say something, it seems that S& and OW are winning cross offers per Fishbowl comments & my experience being involved with recruiting efforts -- but I don't think anybody would call you crazy for picking one over another)