The continuum model performs best for the least anisotropic inclusions (such as the 2 × 2 × 3 rod and the 3 × 3 × 2 disk). The method can overestimate the permittivity of rod-based composites and underestimate that of disks. Several factors account for these discrepancies: (i) The anisotropy of inclusion polarization is only partially accounted for in a parameterization built on spherical inclusions; (ii) The ellipsoidal shape is an imperfect representation of rod-and disk-like inclusions, which do no exhibit sharp tips in the polarization direction, but may be better represented by cylindrical or rounded prism shapes;