This paper compares four permanent displacement models based on Newmark's sliding-block analogy for assessing regional seismic slope-performance. The models vary primarily by the ground motion descriptor used to correlate with Newmark displacement. The first uses peak ground-acceleration (PGA). The second uses PGA but normalizes displacements by predominant period and equivalent cycles. The third uses Arias intensity. The fourth calculates cumulative displacements from double-integrating simulated earthquake accelerograms. The models are implemented in a GIS to characterize seismic slope-performance for the Oakland East quadrangle near San Francisco, California. The resulting slope-performance maps are compared visually and through statistical analysis to expose potential differences and assess the effects of using a particular approach within a decision-making context. These maps were created for the purpose of comparison and are not suitable for use as critical decision-making tools. The models forecast notably different levels of slope-performance, with the PGA-based models predicting the greatest Newmark displacement on average. Thus, considering the variety of slope-performance models, it is suggested that practitioners avoid reliance on a single model. Instead, multiple models can be implemented in a GIS framework to gain a better perspective of the potential hazard and make a more informed decision.