Abstract Soil aggregation is considered a key indicator of soil health to protect soil against erosion, enhance organic C storage, and offer habitat for soil organisms. Various methods to assess aggregation may change interpretations of management, and therefore should be cross‐calibrated. We assessed the impact of initial sieve opening size (8 or 4.75 mm) prior to determination of dry‐stable and water‐stable mean‐weight diameter (MWD) from two fine‐textured soils—a Rhodic Hapludox from São Paulo, Brazil and a Rhodic Kanhapludult from North Carolina, United States. Both soils were subjected to management expected to alter surface soil conditions. As expected, initial sieving through 8 mm led to greater dry‐stable MWD (3.37 ± 0.60 mm) than initial sieving through 4.75 mm (1.94 ± 0.28 mm). However, soil stability index (water‐stable MWD/dry‐stable MWD) was not affected by initial sieve size opening (0.56 ± 0.13 mm mm −1 under both initial sieve openings). Management interpretations were consistent with both approaches as well, and in particular to detect the strong depth effect on water‐stable MWD (i.e., declining with depth). Water‐stable macroaggregates had 32% ± 25% greater C concentration than microaggregates; similarly under both initial sieving conditions. Soil stability index when initially sieved through 4.75 mm was highly associated with aggregate stability of 1–2‐mm sized dry aggregates, which is a more common procedure. We conclude that passing soil through a screen with 4.75‐mm openings to conduct a diversity of soil analyses can be appropriate for obtaining reasonable estimates of and interpretations about surface soil aggregation.