Objective Biomechanics for rupture risk prediction in abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) are gaining popularity. However, their clinical applicability is still doubtful as there is lack of standardization. This study evaluates the added value of biomechanical indices in rupture risk assessment. Methods This study included 175 asymptomatic, 11 sAAA and 45 ruptured aneurysms. 3D-geome-tries were reconstructed using computer tomography angiographies. Subsequently, finite element models were made to calculate peak wall stress (PWS), peak wall rupture index (PWRI) and the rupture risk equivalent diameter (RRED). The indices were determined with a dedicated software to facilitate standardization. Results SAAAs showed a trend towards higher PWS, PWRI and RRED compared to asymptomatic AAAs, but PWS (22.0±5.8 vs. 33.4±15.8 N/cm2), PWRI (0.52±0.2 vs. 1.01±0.64), and RRED (65±60 vs. 98±51 mm) were significantly (p = 0.001) higher in ruptured. However, after diameter-matching no significant differences were seen. The ROC-curves for the maximum diameter and all biomechanical indices were similar but it slightly increased when diameter and biomechanical indices were combined. Conclusions This study showed no added value for biomechanical indices in AAA rupture risk assessment. Additionally, the difficulty of such an assessment increases. However, as symptomatic aneurysms show a trend towards higher biomechanical indices with similar diameters the indices may provide information about aneurysm growth and development.