Oral reading fluency (ORF) assessments are commonly used to screen at-risk readers and to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions as curriculum-based measurements. As with other assessments, equating ORF scores becomes necessary when we want to compare ORF scores from different test forms. Recently, Kara et al. (2023) proposed a model-based equating method for ORF scores. However, they did not provide closed-form asymptotic standard errors (SEs) of the equated ORF scores while it is advocated to report SEs of equating in practice. Therefore, this study aims to address this remaining question. Specifically, the delta method was adopted to derive the asymptotic SEs of equated ORF scores. The ORF scoring was conducted using an approach that takes into account the calibration error. Its performance was compared to the standard practice that ignores calibration errors. It is expected that the two scoring approaches would further have impact on the recovery of equated ORF score SEs. A simulation study was conducted to evaluate the recovery of derived equating SEs in various conditions. Results suggested satisfactory recovery of the derived asymptotic SEs of equated ORF scores. In addition, taking into account the calibration error in ORF scoring can produce more accurate and precise equated ORF score SEs under larger sample sizes and longer test lengths.