This study investigates the relationship between bibliometric indicators and the outcomes of peer reviews. Based on a case study of research groups at the University of Bergen, Norway, we examine how various bibliometric indicators correlate with evaluation ratings given by expert committees. The analysis shows positive but relatively weak correlations for all the selected indicators. Particular attention is devoted to the reasons for the discrepancies. We find that shortcomings of the peers' assessments, of the bibliometric indicators, as well as lack of comparability, can explain why the correlation was not stronger.