The accuracy of certain internal consistency estimators have been questioned in recent years. The present study tests the accuracy of six reliability estimators (Cronbach’s alpha, Omega, Omega Hierarchical, Revelle’s Omega, and Greatest Lower Bound) in 140 simulated conditions of unidimensional continuous data with uncorrelated errors with varying sample sizes, number of items, population reliabilities, and factor loadings. Under these conditions, alpha and omega yielded the most accurate estimations of the population reliability simulated. Alpha consistently underestimated population reliability and demonstrated evidence for itself as a lower bound. Greater underestimations for alpha were observed when tau equivalence was not met, however, underestimations were small and still provided more accurate estimates than all of the estimators except omega. Estimates of reliability were shown to be impacted by sample size, degree of violation of tau equivalence, population reliability and number of items in a scale. Under the conditions simulated here, estimates quantified by alpha and omega yielded the most accurate reflection of population reliability values. A follow-up regression comparing alpha and omega revealed alpha to be more sensitive to degree of violation of tau equivalence whereas omega was impacted greater by sample size and number of items, especially when population reliability was low.