This paper compares and contrasts alternative frameworks, assumptions and measures of policy analytic methods used to value risk.  Many of the methods rise from a shared economic framework but with altered behavioral or aggregation assumptions.  With different assumptions come different measures and values.  This paper compares and contrasts the varying assumptions and risk valuation general measures obtained from benefit-cost analysis, decision analysis, multi-attribute utility analysis, and health based cost-effectiveness measures.  Advanced versions of these and other frameworks may be considered time permitting as numerous variations of standard practice have been proposed.  The paper concludes with a consumer’s guide to risk based valuation so that consumers of the different measures may have a concise comparison of the varying values and the assumptions on which they rest.