If we consider all of the excitations, L-PDFT performs the best with a MUE of 0.20 eV followed by MC-PDFT with a MUE of 0.24 eV. CMS-PDFT performs worse than both MC-PDFT and L-PDFT for these vertical excitations with an overall MUE of 0.39 eV. For both pyrimidine and s-tetrazine, CMS-PDFT agrees with CASSCF, which performs poorly at describing these transitions (Table ). We see that L-PDFT corrects the MC-PDFT vertical excitation for ethylene (MC-PDFT greatly underestimates this excitation). In most cases though, L-PDFT yields similar excitation energies to MC-PDFT, although it is still unknown how L-PDFT will perform when considering a larger number of states (N > 5), and when the number of states whose density matrices are averaged in the of the model space grows. Regardless, it is very encouraging that on this small but representative set of organic molecules, L-PDFT performs as well as MC-PDFT at predicting the vertical excitations.