Overconfidence is a robust cognitive bias with far-reaching implications, but prior research on cultural differences in overconfidence has been conflicting. Our study compares overconfidence in participants from cultures traditionally considered as individualistic (the U.S. and U.K.) with participants from cultures traditionally conceptualized as collectivistic (India and Hong Kong). We measure all three forms of overconfidence using a new paradigm, painting a more comprehensive image of cross-cultural overconfidence than previous studies that do not consistently separate overconfidence forms or employ the same measure to tap different forms. Our first key result is the successful cross-cultural replication of the effect of task difficulty on overestimation and overplacement, which bolsters our faith that our measures operate similarly across cultures. Our second key finding is that while overestimation and overplacement do not appear to show systematic cross-cultural differences, overprecision shows more differences. We replicate previous findings of greater overprecision in participants from collectivistic cultures with all but one of our four overprecision measures. This inconsistency is not too surprising, as different measurements of overprecision often yield conflicting results. Taken as a whole, we believe this study’s usage of the same task to measure all three forms of overconfidence allows it to contribute a more comprehensive picture of cultural differences in overconfidence.