There is limited and inconsistent evidence on whether absolute or relative standing feedback is more influential. Three experiments were conducted to compare the effects of absolute and relative standing feedback on self-evaluative and affective responses. College students completed math tests in a lab setting. They were randomly assigned to one of four feedback conditions resulting from a 2 (Absolute Score: high vs. low) × 2 (Relative Percentile: high vs. low) between-subjects design. The results showed strong and consistent effects of absolute feedback on satisfaction with performance and affect, despite the varied magnitudes of the absolute scores across experiments. In contrast, relative feedback had weaker (Experiment 1) or nonsignificant effects (Experiments 2 and 3). Regarding prediction of future performance, the results were consistent across all three experiments: Absolute feedback affected prediction of absolute scores, whereas relative feedback impacted prediction of percentile ranks. There was also an Absolute × Relative Feedback interaction on predicted percentile ranks (Experiment 3) such that the impact of relative feedback on predicted percentile rank was reduced when participants received higher absolute score. These findings support the hypothesis that absolute feedback is more influential than relative feedback. The theoretical and practical implications of this research as well as future research directions are discussed.