IRCC ran three Express Entry rounds between September 14 and 16, 2026. The batch opened with round 442, a Provincial Nominee Program draw that invited 576 candidates at a cut-off of CRS 734. It closed two days later with round 444, a Senior Managers with Canadian Work Experience round that invited 250 candidates at CRS 389, a gap of 345 points between the two rounds in the same week.
In between, round 443 issued 2,000 invitations under the Canadian Experience Class at a cut-off of 519, continuing a run of CEC draws that has held in a tight band through the summer. Taken together, the three rounds show the pool being worked from several directions at once: provincial nominees at the very top of the score distribution, CEC candidates in the low 500s, and a targeted occupational category reaching much further down.
Anyone tracking their own standing can compare their profile against these cut-offs using the CRS calculator, and the live draw table on this site carries the full history of rounds 442 through 444 alongside every batch before them.
| Round | Date | Category | Invitations | CRS cut-off |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| #442 | September 14, 2026 | Provincial Nominee Program | 576 | 734 |
| #443 | September 15, 2026 | Canadian Experience Class | 2,000 | 519 |
| #444 | September 16, 2026 | Senior managers with Canadian Work Experience | 250 | 389 |
Each bar is the lowest CRS score invited in that round. Invitation counts differ by orders of magnitude between rounds, so they are given as text rather than as a second axis.
PNP
#442 · 576 ITAs
734
CEC
#443 · 2,000 ITAs
519
Senior mgrs
#444 · 250 ITAs
389
600 points is what a provincial nomination adds on its own.
- Provincial nomination
- General programme round
- Category-based selection
The 734 cut-off in round 442 is a nomination score, not a general one
A cut-off of 734 looks out of reach until you account for what a provincial nomination is worth. A nomination from a provincial programme adds 600 points to a candidate's CRS score outright. Someone invited at 734 is not competing on core human capital factors alone; they are a nominee whose underlying score, before the 600-point add-on, is typically in the low-to-mid 100s once age, education, language and work experience are tallied.
This is why PNP rounds and general or category rounds cannot be read on the same scale. A candidate weighing whether to pursue a provincial nomination should treat round 442 as evidence of how competitive the PNP-nominated segment of the pool currently is, not as a benchmark for their own CRS without a nomination in hand.
Canadian Experience Class at 519: a small move worth noting
Round 443's cut-off of 519 sits close to where recent CEC rounds have landed, and the 2,000 invitations issued is a solid, unremarkable volume for this category. Since IRCC removed arranged employment points from the CRS in March 2025, a job offer no longer moves a CEC candidate's score, which means the small week-to-week shifts in the CEC cut-off now reflect changes in the pool's composition of language ability, education and Canadian work experience rather than job-offer points dropping in or out.
For a candidate with a CRS in the high 400s to low 500s, this round is the most directly relevant of the three. It confirms that CEC continues to be drawn regularly and at a cut-off that has not moved dramatically, which is useful context when deciding whether to wait for a general round or focus effort on raising a language or education score before the next draw.
Senior Managers at 389: a category round reaching deep into the pool
Round 444, restricted to Senior Managers with Canadian Work Experience, invited 250 candidates at a cut-off of 389. Category-based rounds like this one select only from within candidates who meet the category's occupational criteria, so they draw from a much smaller sub-pool than a general round. That smaller pool is why the cut-off can sit 130 points below the same week's CEC round.
A candidate who qualifies for a category is often better served checking whether their occupation and experience meet that category's specific requirements than comparing their raw CRS against CEC or PNP cut-offs. Someone unsure how their test results translate into CRS-relevant language points can convert their scores to CLB equivalents to confirm they meet the category's language threshold before assuming they are out of range.
What this batch signals about pacing
Three rounds in three days, spanning PNP, CEC and one category, is consistent with the pattern over the last several batches: IRCC alternating between the general/PNP pairing and a targeted category round within the same week rather than running several general rounds back to back. Read as an observation about recent pacing rather than a signal of future intent, this suggests category and occupation-specific rounds remain a regular, not occasional, feature of the draw calendar.
For candidates without a provincial nomination and without a qualifying occupation for the current category rounds, the practical takeaway is that CEC remains the most accessible route into an invitation, and its cut-off is the number worth watching most closely batch to batch.
What to take from this round
- Round 442's cut-off of 734 reflects a 600-point provincial nomination bonus, not a general-pool score; do not compare it directly to your own CRS unless you hold a nomination.
- Round 443 shows CEC holding at CRS 519 on 2,000 invitations, a useful reference point for candidates without a PNP nomination or category eligibility.
- Round 444's Senior Managers cut-off of 389 only applies to candidates whose occupation and Canadian work experience meet that category's specific criteria.
- Use the CRS calculator to check where your own score falls against these three cut-offs, and convert language test results to CLB if you are unsure whether you meet a category's language threshold.
Round numbers, dates, invitation counts and CRS cut-offs are IRCC's own, from their published rounds of invitations. The analysis is general information, not immigration advice, and reading it creates no consultant-client relationship.