@TheVulcan I also think that publishing separate Admit rate numbers by admission pool is actually counter productive and misleading.
Let’s say the school releases numbers that say that ED admit rate is 17% and EA rate is 6%. What can an applicant really learn from that information, that would be actionable and insightful?
Both pools will have a mix of various demographic categories. Legacies, athletes, full pay, first generation, URM, women, etc.
Each of these pools will have a different admit rates based on institutional needs and individual applicant characteristics. Knowing the average admit rate for each pool often gives bad and incorrect information to an applicant about their individual chances and no school releases detailed admit stats unless compelled by a court case like Harvard was compelled to do.
To assume that an unhooked applicant is better off in the ED pool than the EA/RD pool would be total folly as the Harvard case clearly shows. Unhooked UMC applicants really did not enjoy any unique advantage by applying SCEA to Harvard. They were just misled to think that their chances were better. They would have been better off making that choice based on other factors.