A systematic analysis of intrinsic disorder in proteins started at the turn of the century1–4 and still remains a hot research topic.5 Only this year several papers covering general aspects of protein disorder have been published5– 9 and the discussion on the fundamental principles of disorder continues to unfold.10,11 PubMed search with the keywords “intrinsically disordered protein 2012” and “intrinsically disordered protein 2013” returned 525 and 305 entries, respectively (as of April 2013). The number of experimentally verified intrinsically disordered proteins and regions is steadily increasing. The DisProt database12 currently contains annotations for 684 intrinsically disordered proteins, 1513 disordered regions, and describes 38 different biological functions associated with disordered regions. The more recently established IDEAL database also has a number of useful annotations on disordered proteins.13 Such a high interest in this area of research triggered rapid development of computational methods for prediction of the location of disordered regions in proteins. The recently published reviews and assessment papers14–18 altogether provide a comprehensive analysis of more than fifty disorder prediction methods. An independent assessment of the protein disorder methods within the scope of CASP started in 2002 and is now already in its sixth round.18–22 This study analyzes the results obtained by the 28 disorder prediction groups participating in CASP10.