SummaryEarthquakes are generally clustered, both in time and space. Conventionally, each cluster is made of foreshocks, the mainshock, and aftershocks. Seismic damage can possibly accumulate because of the effects of multiple earthquakes in one cluster and/or because the structure is unrepaired between different clusters. Typically, the performance‐based earthquake engineering (PBEE) framework neglects seismic damage accumulation. This is because (i) probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) only refers to mainshocks and (ii) classical fragility curves represent the failure probability in one event, of given intensity, only. However, for life cycle assessment, it can be necessary to account for the build‐up of seismic losses because of damage in multiple events. It has been already demonstrated that a Markovian model (i.e., a Markov chain), accounting for damage accumulation in multiple mainshocks, can be calibrated by maintaining PSHA from the classical PBEE framework and replacing structural fragility with a set of state‐dependent fragility curves. In fact, the Markov chain also works when damage accumulates in multiple aftershocks from a single mainshock of known magnitude and location, if aftershock PSHA replaces classical PSHA. Herein, this model is extended further, developing a Markovian model that accounts, at the same time, for damage accumulation: (i) within any mainshock–aftershock seismic sequence and (ii) among multiple sequences. The model is illustrated through applications to a series of six‐story reinforced concrete moment‐resisting frame buildings designed for three sites with different seismic hazard levels in Italy. The time‐variant reliability assessment results are compared with the classical PBEE approach and the accumulation model that only considers mainshocks, so as to address the relevance of aftershocks for life cycle assessment.