Differential methylation (DM) is actively recruited in different types of fundamental and translational studies. Currently, microarray- and NGS-based approaches for methylation analysis are the most widely used with multiple statistical models designed to extract differential methylation signatures. The benchmarking of DM models is challenging due to the absence of gold standard data. In this study, we analyze an extensive number of publicly available NGS and microarray datasets with divergent and widely utilized statistical models and apply the recently suggested and validated rank-statistic-based approach Hobotnica to evaluate the quality of their results. Overall, microarray-based methods demonstrate more robust and convergent results, while NGS-based models are highly dissimilar. Tests on the simulated NGS data tend to overestimate the quality of the DM methods and therefore are recommended for use with caution. Evaluation of the top 10 DMC and top 100 DMC in addition to the not-subset signature also shows more stable results for microarray data. Summing up, given the observed heterogeneity in NGS methylation data, the evaluation of newly generated methylation signatures is a crucial step in DM analysis. The Hobotnica metric is coordinated with previously developed quality metrics and provides a robust, sensitive, and informative estimation of methods’ performance and DM signatures’ quality in the absence of gold standard data solving a long-existing problem in DM analysis.