Long-term tall-tower eddy-covariance (EC) measurements have been recently established in three European pilot cities as part of the ICOS-Cities project. We conducted a comparison of EC software to ensure a reliable generation of interoperable flux estimates, which is the prerequisite for avoiding methodological biases and improving the comparability of the results. We analyzed datasets covering 5 months collected from EC tall-tower installations located in urbanized areas of Munich, Zurich, and Paris. Fluxes of sensible heat, latent heat, and CO₂ were calculated using three software packages (i.e., TK3, EddyPro, and eddy4R) to assess the uncertainty of flux estimations attributed to differences in implemented postprocessing schemes. A very good agreement on the mean values and standard deviations was found across all three sites, which can probably be attributed to a uniform instrumentation, data acquisition, and preprocessing. The overall comparison of final flux time series products showed a good but not yet perfect agreement among the three software packages. TK3 and EddyPro both calculated fluxes with low-frequency spectral correction, resulting in better agreement than between TK3 and the eddy4R workflow with disabled low-frequency spectral treatment. These observed flux discrepancies indicate the crucial role of treating low-frequency spectral loss in flux estimation for tall-tower EC systems.