This study aims to compare 3 observational techniques for assessing postural load, namely, OWAS, RULA, and REBA. The comparison was based on the evaluation results generated by the classification techniques using 301 working postures. All postures were sampled from the iron and steel, electronics, automotive, and chemical industries, and a general hospital. While only about 21% of the 301 postures were classified at the action category/level 3 or 4 by both OWAS and REBA, about 56% of the postures were classified into action level 3 or 4 by RULA. The inter-method reliability for postural load category between OWAS and RULA was just 29.2%, and the reliability between RULA and REBA was 48.2%. These results showed that compared to RULA, OWAS, and REBA generally underestimated postural loads for the analyzed postures, irrespective of industry, work type, and whether or not the body postures were in a balanced state.