We study the effect of disclosing relative performance information (feedback) on students’ performance in high-school and on subsequent university enrolment. We exploit a large scale natural experiment where students in some cohorts are provided with their national and school relative performance. Using unique primary collected data, we find an asymmetric response to the relative performance information: high achieving students improve their last-year performance by 0.15 standard deviations whereas the last-year performance of low achieving students drops by 0.3 standard deviations. The results are more pronounced for females indicating greater sensitivity to feedback. We also document the long term effect of feedback provision: high achieving students reduce their repetition rate of the national exams, enrol into 0.15 standard deviations more popular University Departments and their expected annual earnings increase by 0.17 standard deviations. Results are opposite for low achieving students. We find suggestive evidence that feedback encourages more students from low-income neighborhoods to enrol in university and to study in higher-quality programs indicating a potential decrease in income inequality.