Accurate modelling of changes in freshwater supplies is critical in an era of increasing human demand, and changes in land use and climate. However, there are concerns that current landscape-scale models do not sufficiently capture catchment-level changes, whilst large-scale comparisons of empirical and simulated water yield changes are lacking. Here we modelled annual water yield in two time periods (1: 1985–1994 and 2: 2008–2017) across 81 catchments in England and validated against empirical data. Our objectives were to i) investigate whether modelling absolute or relative change in water yield is more accurate and ii) determine which predictors have the greatest impact on model accuracy. We used the Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs (InVEST) Annual Water Yield model. In this study, absolute values refer to volumetric units of million cubic metres per year (Mm³/y), either at the catchment or hectare level. Modelled annual yields showed high accuracy as indicated by the low Mean Absolute Deviation (MAD, based on normalised data, 0 is high and 1 is low accuracy) at the catchment (1: 0.013 ± 0.019, 2: 0.012 ± 0.020) and hectare scales (1: 0.03 ± 0.030, 2: 0.030 ± 0.025). But accuracy of modelled absolute change in water yield showed a more moderate fit on both the catchment (MAD = 0.055 ± 0.065) and hectare (MAD = 0.105 ± 0.089) scales. Relative change had lower accuracy (MAD = 0.189 ± 0.135). Anthropogenic modifications to the hydrological system, including water abstraction contributed significantly to the inaccuracy of change values at the catchment and hectare scales. Quantification of changes in freshwater provision can be more accurately articulated using absolute values rather than using relative values. Absolute values can provide clearer guidance for mitigation measures related to human consumption. Accuracy of modelled change is related to different aspects of human consumption, suggesting anthropogenic impacts are critically important to consider when modelling water yield.