Five statistical and dynamical tropical cyclone intensity guidance techniques available at the National Hurricane Center (NHC) during the 2003 and 2004 Atlantic and eastern North Pacific seasons were evaluated within three intensity phases: (I) formation; (II) early intensification, with a subcategory (IIa) of a decay and reintensification cycle; and (III) decay. In phase I in the Atlantic, the various techniques tended to predict that a tropical storm would form from six tropical depressions that did not develop further, and thus the tendency was for false alarms in these cases. For the other 24 depressions that did become tropical storms, the statistical-dynamical techniques, statistical hurricane prediction scheme (SHIPS) and decay SHIPS (DSHIPS), have some skill relative to the 5-day statistical hurricane intensity forecast climatology and persistence technique, but they also tend to intensify all depressions and thus are prone to false alarms. In phase II, the statistical-dynamical models SHIPS and DSHIPS do not predict the rapid intensification cases (Ն30 kt in 24 h) 48 h in advance. Although the dynamical Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Interpolated model does predict rapid intensification, many of these cases are at the incorrect times with many false alarms. The best performances in forecasting at least 24 h in advance the 21 decay and reintensification cycles in the Atlantic were the three forecasts by the dynamical Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Model-Navy (interpolated) model. Whereas DSHIPS was the best technique in the Atlantic during the decay phase III, none of the techniques excelled in the eastern North Pacific. All techniques tend to decay the tropical cyclones in both basins too slowly, except that DSHIPS performed well (12 of 18) during rapid decay events in the Atlantic. This evaluation indicates where NHC forecasters have deficient guidance and thus where research is necessary for improving intensity forecasts.