The diagenetic overprint in rhythmic hemipelagic successions can either enhance or change the original distribution of CaCO3, but it is difficult to evaluate its effect because in most field examples, it is not possible to distinguish between sedimentary and diagenetic features. The rhythmic succession of the Pliensbachian of Asturias (Spain) shows alternation of bioclastic and laminated/burrowed intervals. The original content of carbonate brought by storms from shallow areas was larger in the bioclastic horizons. However, there is a widespread mismatch between facies alternations and the observed lithological rhythms. The diagenetic redistribution of CaCO3 resulted in successive limestone–marl/clay couplets that do not match (either in number or in the location of the boundaries) the sedimentary cycles defined by facies alternations. We conclude that interpreting the limestone–marl rhythms as a direct response to primary changes is highly questionable, unless there is unequivocal proof of a sedimentary origin of the alternation of the two lithologies.