In the current study structural stability were determined using three methods of Kemper and Rosenau, Le Bissonnis, and Levey and Miller. The stabilities are expressed in terms of three indices as water aggregate stability (WAS), mean weight diameter (MWD) and stability ratio (SR), respectively. Nineteen soils with broad range of organic carbon content (OC), calcium carbonate equivalent (CCE), (ECe), SAR and texture were employed. Purposes were to evaluate a) effects of the above soil parameters on three stability indices, b) to examine the limitations may rise practically in the measurements and c) to compare degree of agreement between the three indices. WAS varied from 6% to 89%; 64% of the variation (R=0.80**) resulted by the variation in OC. WAS significantly and adversely affected by CCE (R=-0.62**) and SAR (R=-0.52*). In spite of wide variation is soil texture among 19 soils, it did not produced significant effect on WAS. Measurements of MWD in the examined soils dominant in clay fraction, were unsuccessful due to cementing of the particles after the weighing and oven drying steps and, therefore, it was measured only in 12 soils where this problem was not occurred. MWD measured under three initial wetting conditions of the aggregates, namely, fast (MWDf), slow (MWDs) and slow with shaking (MWDsh) were slightly different and their mean differences were insignificant (P<0.05). Due to simpilicity and rapidity of measurement, MWDf appears sufficient enough as a stability index of Le Bissonnis method and there seems no need for the measurements of MWDs and MWDsh. MWDf ranged from 0.32 to 1.17: Soil OC attributed to 84% (R=0.91) of its variation, implying that MWDr basically was dependent to OC. In contrast to WAS, MWDf was not statistically correlated to either CCE or SAR, but instead was significantly affected by sand (R=0.74**) and clay (R=-0.61**) contents of the soils. It, therefore, appears that using MWDf as a stability criterion for the comparison of structural stability among soils would be justifiable if the main variant among them is texture rather than chemical characters such as CCE, EC or SAR. SR ranged from 0.29 to 0.89 (theoretical range is 0 to 1.) and its response to soil parameter variations was quite similar to MWDr. Among the three indices, there was more close agreement (R=0.8t*) between SR and WAS than between MWDf and WAS (R=0.71**). Using SR, 12 examined soils could be grouped in three qualitative structure stability classes namely highly stable (SR³0.81), moderately stable (0.42<SR<0.81) and poorly stable (SR<0.42). These ranges are, however, arbitrary and their generalization for a reasonable justification about the structural behavior in response to management needs a broad investigation.