We performed a large scale study of electron transfer dissociation (ETD) performance, as compared with ion trap collision-activated dissociation (CAD), for peptides ranging from ϳ1000 to 5000 Da (n ϳ 4000). These data indicate relatively little overlap in peptide identifications between the two methods (ϳ12%). ETD outperformed CAD for all charge states greater than 2; however, regardless of precursor charge a linear decrease in percent fragmentation, as a function of increasing precursor m/z, was observed with ETD fragmentation. We postulate that several precursor cation attributes, including peptide length, charge distribution, and total mass, could be relevant players. To examine these parameters unique ETDidentified peptides were sorted by length, and the ratio of amino acid residues per precursor charge (residues/ charge) was calculated. We observed excellent correlation between the ratio of residues/charge and percent fragmentation. For peptides of a given residue/charge ratio, there is no correlation between peptide mass and percent fragmentation; instead we conclude that the ratio of residues/charge is the main factor in determining a successful ETD outcome. As charge density decreases so does the probability of non-covalent interactions that can bind a newly formed c/z-type ion pair. Recently we have described a supplemental activation approach (ETcaD) to convert these non-dissociative electron transfer product ions to useful c-and z-type ions. Automated implementation of such methods should remove this apparent precursor m/z ceiling. Finally, we evaluated the role of ion density (both anionic and cationic) and reaction duration for an ETD experiment. These data indicate that the best performance is achieved when the ion trap is filled to its space charge limit with anionic reagents. In this largest scale study of ETD to date, ETD continues to show great promise to propel the field of proteomics and, for small-to medium-sized peptides, is highly complementary to ion trap CAD. Electron transfer dissociation (ETD), 1 a relatively new peptide/protein fragmentation method, holds great promise to advance the field of protein mass spectrometry (1-3). As compared with the conventional technique, collision-activated dissociation (CAD), ETD offers a more robust method to characterize post-translational modifications (PTMs) and to interrogate large peptides or even whole proteins (4 -7). Because of these attributes and the fact that it generates c-and z-type products, instead of b-and y-type, many propose that ETD is highly complementary to CAD. ETD reactions, of course, are generally conducted within the confines of ion trap mass spectrometers where sequential CAD and ETD experiments are easily performed. Most proteomics experiments, however, are coupled with on-line chromatographic separations, and analysis time, per peptide, is ideally minimized to increase dynamic range (8). Thus, to extract the most information from a given experiment, knowledge of how these two dissociation techniques complement one another ...