This article compares cut scores from two variations of the Hofstee and Beuk methods, which determine cut scores by resolving inconsistencies in panelists' judgments about cut scores and pass rates, with the Angoff method. The first variation uses responses to the Hofstee and Beuk percentage correct and pass rate questions to calculate cut scores. The second variation uses Angoff ratings to determine percentage correct data in combination with responses to pass rate questions. Analysis of data from 15 standard settings suggested that the Hofstee and Beuk methods yielded similar cut scores, and that cut scores were about 2% lower when using Angoff ratings. The two approaches also differed in the weight assigned to cut score judgments in the Beuk method and in the occurrence of undefined cut scores in the Hofstee method. Findings also indicated that the Hofstee and Beuk methods often produced higher cut scores and lower pass rates than the Angoff method. It is suggested that attention needs to be paid to the strategy used to estimate Hofstee and Beuk cut scores.