The purpose of this study was to compare the most commonly used methods for assessing body composition in females. Body composition measures were recorded for 20 females ages 18 to 64 years via calipers, hand-held bioelectrical impedance (BIA), standing BIA, and body mass index (BMI). To control for BIA measure variations due to hydration levels, no food was consumed by participants for a minimum of two hours prior to testing. Fifteen minutes prior to testing, participants consumed a 16-ounce bottle of room temperature water. For each participant, measures were taken in the order of: height, weight, skinfolds, hand-held BIA, and standing BIA. Using Lange calipers, three sites were used for the skinfold measures. Males were measured at the chest, abdomen, and thigh. Females were measured at the triceps, suprailiac, and thigh. Three trials were taken at each site and an average was used to determine the sum for the three sites. This sum was compared to The Cooper Institute Percent Fat Estimates (2000) to determine the percentage. Height, weight, and standing BIA measures were taken with participants in bare feet. To ensure accurate readings with BIA methods, participants removed all metal items (jewelry, glasses, clothing with zippers, etc.). Pearson correlations were computed among all of the body composition methods. All methods were found to be statistically related (p< .001). Six paired sample t-tests were calculated to compare the different methods. For the comparisons of hand-held BIA and skinfolds, skinfolds and BMI, and hand-held BIA and BMI, no significant differences (p>.05) were found. However, for the standing BIA comparisons, significant differences were found: standing and hand-held (t=5.84, p=.000, p<.001), standing and skinfolds (t=3.89, p=.001, p<.01), and standing and BMI (t=5.88, p=.000, p<.001). Standing BIA had a mean of 31.08% compared to BMI, hand-held BIA, and skinfolds with 24.60%, 25.81%, and 26.40% respectively. These findings suggest that BMI, calipers, and hand-held BIA can all be used for assessing body composition in females. What is the reason for the significantly higher standing BIA readings for females? The standing BIA manufacturer provides a norms chart which depicts a higher “healthy” percentage for females than typically used with other methods. Body fat in women is stored in the reproductive region, or the lower portion of the body. Is the higher percentage on the standing BIA due to inaccuracies with the method or due to the fact that fat storage is in the area being evaluated?