The Aethalometer is a widely used instrument for black carbon (BC) mass concentration and light absorption coefficient (b_abs) measurements around the world. However, field intercomparison of the two popular models, dual-spot (AE33) and single-spot (AE31) Aethalometers, remains limited; in addition, the difference in secondary brown carbon (BrC_sec) light absorption estimation between the two models is largely unknown. We performed full-year collocated AE33 and AE31 measurements in a megacity in southern China – Guangzhou. The b_abs values agree well between the two Aethalometers (R² > 0.95), with AE33  AE31 slopes ranging from 0.87 to 1.04 for seven wavelengths. AE33 consistently exhibits lower limits of detection (LODs) than AE31 for time resolutions of 2 to 60 min. The AE33  AE31 slope for equivalent BC (eBC) was 1.2, implying the need for site-specific post-correction. The absorption Ångström exponent (AAE) obtained from different approaches does not agree very well between the two models, with the biggest discrepancy found in AAE_880/950. The estimated BrC_sec light absorption at 370 nm (b_{abs370_BrCsec}) was calculated using the minimum-R-squared (MRS) method for both Aethalometers. The b_{abs370_BrCsec} comparison yields a slope of 0.78 and an R² of 0.72 between the two models, implying a non-negligible inter-instrument difference. This study highlights the high consistency in b_abs but less so in AAE between AE31 and AE33 and reveals site-specific correction for eBC estimation and non-negligible difference in BrC_sec estimation. The results are valuable for data continuity in long-term Aethalometer measurements when transitioning from the older (AE31) to the newer (AE33) model, as anticipated in permanent global-climate and air-quality stations.