The present study compares the higher-level dimensions and the hierarchical structures of the fifth edition of the 16 PF with those of the NEO PI-R. Both inventories measure personality according to five higher-level dimensions. These inventories were however constructed according to different methods (bottom-up vs. top-down). 386 participants filled out both questionnaires. Correlations, regressions and canonical correlations made it possible to compare the inventories. As expected they roughly measure the same aspects of personality. There is a coherent association among four of the five dimensions measured in the tests. However Agreeableness, the remaining dimension in the NEO PI-R, is not represented in the 16 PF 5. Our analyses confirmed the hierarchical structures of both instruments, but this confirmation was more complete in the case of the NEO PI-R. Indeed, a parallel analysis indicated that a four-factor solution should be considered in the case of the 16 PF 5. On the other hand, the NEO PI-R's five-factor solution was confirmed. The top-down construction of this instrument seems to make for a more legible structure. Of the two five-dimension constructs, the NEO PI-R thus seems the more reliable. This confirms the relevance of the Five Factor Model of personality.