The moderation of evaluation results is a common practice in many educational systems. Its goals are to reinforce equity between students’ results and/or their comparability when assessment is used to certify or select students. Depending on the context, different methods are applied. Two approaches are identified: statistical moderation and social moderation. The first is generally a statistical transformation of students’ results using a calibration test. The second is a professional development and collaborative work approach that leads teachers to collectively build common evaluation practices using standards. This paper proposes a theoretical reflection that allows a description of these two approaches (their different methods, contributions and limits) in order to compare them and to identify what are the stakes for the different actors of the school system. A number of recommendations related to their conditions of use are considered in conclusion.