This research describes, classifies, and comparatively evaluates national models and mechanisms used to evaluate research and allocate research funding in 16 countries. Although these models and mechanisms vary widely in terms of how research is evaluated and financed, nearly all share the common characteristic of relating funding to some measure of past performance. Each of these 16 national models and mechanisms were rated by independent, blinded panels of professional researchers and evaluators in two countries on more than 25 quality indicators. The national models were then ranked using the panels' ratings, in terms of their validity, credibility, utility, cost-effectiveness, and ethicality. The highest ratings were received by nations using large-scale research assessment exercises. Bulk funding and indicator-driven models received substantially lower ratings. Implications for research evaluation practice and policy are considered and discussed. (Contains 4 tables, 3 figures and 2 notes.)