A code-to-code comparison of the dynamic characteristics of an end-anchored floating pontoon bridge is presented for two commercial software commonly used in the offshore industry, i.e. SIMO-RIFLEX and ORCAFLEX. Furthermore, a second comparison of the hydrodynamic properties of the floating pontoons are compared between two commercial Boundary Element Method software, i.e. AQWA and WADAM. The pontoons are modelled with an extended bottom to change the dynamic properties of the bridge structure. Viscous effects of this so-called heave plate is not considered in the study. The study shows good comparisons between the natural periods of the floating bridge structure and both software yield good convergence in the time domain. However, significant differences in the stochastic response has been found. NOMENCLATURE Hs Significant wave height. Tp Wave spectrum peak period. γ Wave spectrum peakedness parameter. s Spreading exponent in the cos spreading function. rx Radius of gyration. EA Axial stiffness. EIy Bending stiffness about weak axis. EIz Bending stiffness about strong axis. GIx Torsional stiffness. θ0 Main wave direction in the spreading function. ∆t Time step in dynamic simulation. H3 Pontoon heave first-order wave force transfer function. A33 Pontoon heave-heave added mass. B33 Pontoon heave-heave potential damping. ne Number of elements in bridge girder between each pontoon. Tn Natural period for mode n. ξ Structural damping ratio. My Moment about weak girder axis. z Vertical displacement. z̈ Vertical acceleration. C55 Hydrostatic stiffness in pitch. Aw Waterplane area. σx Standard deviation of response x. σx Average standard deviation of response x. γint Numerical time integration parameter. βint Numerical time integration parameter. Proceedings of the ASME 2018 37th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering OMAE2018 June 17-22, 2018, Madrid, Spain