In this study, forecast errors in dust vertical distributions were analyzed. This was carried out by using quantitative comparisons between dust vertical profiles retrieved from lidar measurements over Rome, Italy, and those predicted by models. Three models were used: the four-particle-size Dust Regional Atmospheric Model (DREAM), the older one-particle-size version of the SKIRON model from the University of Athens (UOA), and the pre-2006 one-particle-size Tel Aviv University (TAU) model. SKIRON and DREAM are initialized on a daily basis using the dust concentration from the previous forecast cycle, while the TAU model initialization is based on the Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer aerosol index (TOMS AI). The quantitative comparison shows that (1) the use of four-particle-size bins in the dust modeling instead of only one-size bin improves dust forecasts, (2) cloud presence could contribute to additional dust forecast errors in SKIRON and DREAM, (3) as far as the TAU model is concerned, its forecast errors were mainly caused by technical problems with TOMS measurements from the Earth Probe satellite. As a result, dust forecast errors in the TAU model could be significant even under cloudless conditions.