We have read Cruz and Alexander’s comments regarding our manuscript titled ‘‘Evaluating Crown Fire Rate of Spread Predictions from Physics-Based Models’’  and appreciate the opportunity to respond to their comments. In our original manuscript , we presented an evaluation of crown fire rate of spread predictions from two physics-based wildland fire behavior models: FIRETEC and the Wildland Urban Interface Fire Dynamics Simulator (WFDS). Our approach, as outlined in our original paper, relied upon using a previously published dataset of real-world crown fires, hereafter referred to as AC06 , and previously published fire rate of spread predictions. Following recommendations for model performance assessment proposed in Rykiel , we examined the proportion of simulated crown fire rates of spread that fell within a 95th percentile prediction interval we developed using the data in AC06. We also provided several discussion points about the challenges associated with evaluating physics-based model performance, potential sources of error/disagreement, and future research needs. Our manuscript built upon an existing body of work and offered insights based on one of many potential approaches that can be used to assess physics-based model performance.