The dipole moment of each quantum subsystem in a vacuum and embedded in their respective environments modeled by MFCC-or MFCC(HB)-based embedding potentials are presented in Table . The first thing to note is that the differences between dipoles obtained using MFCC and MFCC(HB) are small compared to the change when going from a vacuum to an environment. This is expected since the standard MFCC-based potentials already capture the main environmental effects. Second, the differences between the MFCCand MFCC(HB)-based dipoles correlate well with the RMSDs between the MFCC-and MFCC(HB)-based embedding potentials given in Table . The dipole strengths are generally reduced when switching to MFCC(HB) except for HBDI -, where it goes up by 0.9 D, corresponding to a 6.8% increase. The latter is also the largest absolute difference, followed closely by the 0.7 D decrease in PRSB + , which, however, corresponds only to a 2.8% reduction. The largest relative difference is observed for permanganate, where the dipole strength is reduced by 17.4% corresponding to 0.4 D. In Table , we present differences between selected lowest excitation energies, oscillator strengths, and TPA cross-sections obtained using MFCC and MFCC(HB). Unlike for the dipoles, there is no apparent correlation with the RMSDs between the MFCC-and MFCC(HB)-based embedding potentials because the environment effect is more complicated for these properties. In general, the differences between the excitation energies are modest, ranging between 0.01 and 0.03 eV. The oscillator strengths are hardly affected, while the TPA cross-sections seem to be somewhat more sensitive, but the differences are still rather small.