Habitat Evolution Mapping Project (HEMP) and the Baylands Habitat Map (BHM) are both effective mapping products that can be used for longitudinal habitat change analyses, but direct comparisons between the two require adjustments due to differences in methodology. HEMP is created using pixel-based supervised classification on spectral imagery, while BHM is created using object-based image classification of elevation, imagery, and auxiliary information. This leads to differences in classification and in spatial heterogeneity. We performed an assessment of how HEMP and BHM compare in similar years (2021 and 2020) and the same spatial areas in the South Bay. The greatest difference in results between HEMP and BHM are mostly located in managed or restored regions, which reflect methodological differences and limitations on data availability. While a direct comparison between HEMP and BHM can be nuanced, simplified metrics such as total tidal marsh extent and the unvegetated to vegetated ratio can allow for foundational assessments of the success of restoration projects. We found that HEMP and BHM generally align at this level of analysis and there are no unexplained systematic differences. This geodatabase contains two feature classes: one is a crosswalked version of Baylands Habitat Map 2020 to a four-class scheme (Marsh, Nonvegetated, Upland, Water/Mudflat) that aids in direct comparison and longitudinal change comparison with HEMP 2021. The other is its compliment, a crosswalked version of HEMP 2021 to the same four-class scheme that aids in direct comparison and longitudinal change comparison with BHM 2020.