When we compare the diverse methods submitted, some observations stand out. First, performance of Noneq/Alchemy/GAFF and Docking/GAFF/YANK_REF methods was quite similar with an RMS difference of 0.8 kcal/mol -likely due to use of the same force field (GAFF) and water model (TIP3P) despite the fact that the former used nonequilibrium free energy techniques and the latter used equilibrium, suggesting the force field played a larger role. Along the same lines, several nonequilibrium methods (FSDAM/GAFF2/OPC3, Noneq/Alchemy/CGENFF, and Noneq/Alchemy/GAFF) all used similar techniques but different force field/water model, and performance was thus reasonably similar with an RMS difference of at most 0.32 kcal/mol. In addition, binding free energy calculations have been shown to be more accurate using GAFF2 opposed to GAFF in previous computational studies .