Beginning in fiscal 2007, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) allowed foreign companies traded on U.S. stock exchanges to report under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) or U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (U.S. GAAP). This study investigates if analyst forecast accuracy is affected by the reporting standards used. If U.S. GAAP and IFRS are equivalent sets of high-quality standards, as purported by the IASB and SEC, then there should not be any difference in forecast accuracy. If, on the other hand, analyst forecast accuracy differs based on the accounting standards used, the U.S. GAAP and IFRS may not be comparable. With a sample of 366 firm-years from 2007 to 2010, we find that there are no significant differences in forecast errors for companies reporting under IFRS versus U.S. GAAP. This result indicates that the information provided by both sets of standards is sufficient for sophisticated users. This is especially important because foreign companies traded on U.S. exchanges will be electing between these two alternative reporting methods into the foreseeable future. In addition, there is some discussion that the SEC may allow U.S. companies to report under either method, so this study informs that debate. Our results indicate that the predictive models employed by analysts are equally effective when based on financial results reported under U.S. GAAP or IFRS.