Well-known　methods　for　seismic　performance　assessment,　such　as　incremental　dynamic　analysis　(IDA),　multi-stripes　analysis　(MSA)　and　the　cloud　method,　involve　nonlinear　response　time-history　analyses　to　characterize　the　relationship　between　the　chosen　damage　measure　versus　intensity　measure.　Over　the　past　two　decades,　many　authors　have　proposed　simplified　procedures　or　nonlinear　static　approaches　to　develop　fragility.　In　these　procedures,　the　capacity　of　the　system　is　evaluated　by　nonlinear　static　procedures　(i.e.,　the　capacity　spectrum　method　(CSM),　the　N2　method,　modal　pushover　analysis　(MPA))　and　the　demand　is　derived　by　response　spectra.　In　addition　to　the　familiar　ones,　incremental　modal　pushover　analysis　(IMPA)　is　a　novel　nonlinear　static　procedure　proposed　in　recent　years,　and　it　is　used　in　this　research　to　present　an　IM-based　fragility　estimation.　The　accuracy　and　effectiveness　of　different　methods　to　assess　vulnerability　are　investigated　by　comparing　fragility　curves　derived　by　MPA-based　cloud　analysis,　IMPA　and　cloud　analysis　against　IDA.　The　comparison　gives　valuable　insights　on　the　influence　of　scaling　on　different　sets　of　records;　however,　a　more　extended　validation　is　needed　to　confirm　the　obtained　results　and　draw　more　general　conclusions.　Results　arise　from　two　relatively　small　bins　of　record　motions　differing　by　ranges　of　Joyner-Boore　distance　and　scattered　in　a　range　of　magnitude　are　presented.