Abstract Predictive equations and methods tend to overestimate or underestimate resting energy expenditure (REE) compared with indirect calorimetry (IC). This cross-sectional study aimed to evaluate the agreement between methods and equations for REE estimation of overweight and obese Brazilian men. Data from 48 healthy volunteers, ages 20 to 43 years and with body mass index ranging from 26.4 to 35.2, were collected between October 2008 and October 2009. REE was measured by IC, using Deltatrac (IC1) and KORR-MetaCheck (IC2) devices. It was estimated by bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) using tetrapolar (BIA1) and bipolar (BIA2) devices, and by the equations of Mifflin, World Health Organization/Food and Agriculture Organization/United Nations University, Fleisch, Horie-Waitzberg and Gonzalez, and Ireton-Jones. The association and agreement among the methods and equations were assessed by the interclass correlation coefficient, Bland-Altman analysis, and by the percentage of the difference between values obtained from the standard method and alternative methods and equations. Most methods showed high agreement with IC1. The highest agreements were found for Mifflin (−2.14%), Fleisch (−3.05%), Horie-Waitzberg and Gonzalez (4.41%), and BIA2 (5.25%). Similar results were shown by the Bland-Altman analyses. BIA2, followed by BIA1, Ireton-Jones, Mifflin, and Fleisch, showed the highest association with IC1. Thus, the Mifflin, Fleisch, Horie-Waitzberg and Gonzalez equations, and BIA2, were the most accurate methods for REE estimation in this study. However, because those equations have shown considerable variability, they should be used cautiously. In addition, the IC2 was not found to be an accurate method for REE estimation in overweight and obese men included in this study.