When an individual is suspected of driving under the influence of drugs (DUID), there are currently no applicable methods for collecting bodily fluids for analysis. Oral fluid (OF) is a promising matrix due to its abundance and ease of access when compared to other bodily matrices, such as blood and urine. Multiple different OF collection devices have been developed but few have been implemented by law enforcement agencies, potentially because of a lack of research regarding the stability of the collection matrices. This study analyzed the stability of two different types of OF collection, QuiksalTM and QuantisalTM. Samples were spiked with a panel of fourteen analytes and placed in one of five storage conditions for up to either seven or sixty days, depending on the storage temperature. Samples were then quantified using a Shimdazu 8050 LC-MS/MS and the resulting percent recoveries were compared between each collection device, and the change in percent recovery over the storage time was analyzed for significance. It was determined that both collection devices can provide reliable results when samples are kept in storage at -20°C, or when samples are analyzed within one day of collection. QuantisalTM TMoverall demonstrated higher stability with higher temperatures and longer storage conditions than QuiksalTM, but these differences between collection devices were not significant in the above conditions. Cocaine degraded significantly in QuantisalTM at temperatures above 25°C, but this was not observed with the QuiksalTM collection device. Significant loss was seen with THC and derivatives of the compound, but greater loss was seen with QuiksalTM than with QuantisalTM. This study provides the first comparison using QuiksalTM, and serves as the foundation for further research, with the goal of providing law enforcement agencies with enough data to make an informed decision about which collection device to implement into their roadside collection practices.