The Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) model presently serves as a blueprint for both test development and a taxonomy for clinical interpretation of modern tests of cognitive ability. Accordingly, the trend among test publishers has been toward creating tests that provide users with an ever-increasing array of scores that comport with CHC. However, an accumulating body of independent research on modern intelligence tests has questioned many instruments' alignment with the CHC model. To shed potential insight on these discrepancies, we review the developmental history of CHC and its numerous modifications from 1997 to the present. Next, we identify and discuss several potential limitations in the CHC literature that may be responsible for this discrepancy. Finally, we encourage clinicians to consider the extant evidence currently available for engaging in CHC-inspired assessment applications (e.g., XBA, PSW).