  Following an extensive simulation study comparing the operating
characteristics of three different procedures used for establishing equivalence
(the frequentist `TOST", the Bayesian "HDI-ROPE", and the Bayes factor interval
null procedure), Linde et al. (2021) conclude with the recommendation that
"researchers rely more on the Bayes factor interval null approach for
quantifying evidence for equivalence." We redo the simulation study of Linde et
al. (2021) in its entirety but with the different procedures calibrated to have
the same predetermined maximum type 1 error rate. Our results suggest that the
Bayes Factor, HDI-ROPE, and frequentist equivalence testing are all essentially
equivalent when it comes to predicting equivalence.
