Admission of applicants to higher education in a fair, reliable, transparent, and efficient way is a real challenge, especially if there are more eligible applicants than available places and if there are applicants from many different educational systems. Previous research on best practices for admission to master’s programmes identified the key question about an applicant’s potential for success in studies, but was not able to provide an answer about how to rate the merits of the applicants. In this study, indicators for study success are analysed by comparing the study performance of 228 students in master’s programmes with their merits at the time of admission. The null hypothesis was that the applicant’s average grade at the time of admission is the only indictor for study success. After testing for potential bias using almost 20 possible other indicators, the null hypothesis had to be rejected for four indicators (in order of importance): (i) university ranking, (ii) length of bachelor’s studies within subject, (iii) English language test and (iv) subject matching between bachelor’s and master’s education. Evaluation of quality of prior education is tricky and results from this study clearly indicate that students from higher ranked universities possess better knowledge and stronger skills for our master’s programmes. Work is ongoing to improve the merit rating model by involving more master’s programmes at KTH and analysing performance data from a larger number of students.