Yes that combo seems to be the best indicator of success at least on a regional basis. (Although I know there are some ELC folks who struck out everywhere. )
I’m most curious about the kids that did NOT have those two indicators. What pulled them out of the pile and what point in the review process were they actually pulled out of the pile for a close look? With a lower than average gpa and lesser course rigor, what makes a candidate stand out? Obviously it’s the PIQs and Activities, but with 3-6 minutes of review time for each application what does that actually look like? Are points or multiplication-factors assigned by readers? Like, +2 for club president, x2 for published research, etc?