This study conducts a consistent and comprehensive comparison of several methods for estimating upper subcritical limits (USLs) for nuclear criticality safety analysis. To eliminate inconsistency caused by the discrepancy between the estimated covariance data and the true degree of uncertainty present in nuclear data, the experimental system eigenvalues were assumed to equal the calculated eigenvalue for the systems using nominal ENDF/B-VII.1 cross sections, and the estimated calculated eigenvalue was assumed to equal the calculated eigenvalue for the systems using nuclear data from one perturbed cross-section library. USLs are estimated for a variety of validation application cases using the Whisper, TSURFER, and USLSTATS tools and are compared to a reference 95/95 limit. The TSURFER approach produced the strongest agreement with the reference USLs; the Whisper produced USLs that were reliably conservative compared to the reference USL; and the USLSTATS approach experienced difficulty consistently producing accurate USL estimates. Last, this study observed a noteworthy discrepancy when using Cholesky decomposition to randomly sample neutron cross-section covariance data that are small in magnitude.