In this study, a meta-analysis of reading and listening comprehension comparisons across age groups was conducted. Based on robust variance estimation (46 studies; N = 4,687), the overall difference between reading and listening comprehension was not reliably different (g = 0.07, p = 0.23). Reading was beneficial over listening when the reading condition was self-paced (g = 0.13, p = 0.049) rather than experimenter-paced (g = -0.32, p = 0.16). Reading also had a benefit when inferential and general comprehension rather than literal comprehension was assessed (g = 0.36, p = 0.02; g = 0.15, p = 0.05; g = -0.01, p = 0.93, respectively). There was some indication that reading and listening were more similar in languages with transparent orthographies than opaque orthographies (g = 0.001, p = .99; g = 0.10, p = 0.19, respectively). The findings may be used to inform theories of comprehension about modality influences in that both lower-level skill and affordances vary comparisons of reading and listening comprehension. Moreover, the findings may guide choices of modality; however, both audio and written options are needed for accessible instruction.