Both terms can be metaphysically ambiguous at the best of times, so it really depends on your definition of both beauty and success.
If for instance, we took beauty to mean physically attractive, which obviously differs from person to person anyway. But for arguments sake, let’s say we quantified physical beauty via facial symmetry, ratios, complexion, hip / shoulder to waist ratio etc.
Then how exactly would you go about measuring success? Most people tend to view monetary success as a general indicator. So let’s take the 20 richest people in the world http://www.businessinsider.com/forbes-richest-billionaires-2014-3?op=1
Not seeing much of a correlation between success and physical beauty here. So it really depends on how you define both.
Maybe the successful achievement of personal ambitions and goals, but what if an individual’s highest ambition is to be a good parent, or to have led a good and honest life? Does that make them unsuccessful because they never built a business empire, or became a sports/movie superstar?
Personally, I would agree with Wolverine in so much that most have a slightly skewed view of people they find beautiful i.e. more likely to be given favours, can get away with things less attractive counterparts could (In certain circumstances and environments, of course). But I’ve met beautiful people with little to no ambition in any aspect of their lives, and plain or average looking high achievers. I would say, like everything else, it depends on the person. When I recall the names of some of the greatest or well-known people in history, I’m struggling to think of any that were particularly "beautiful".