In this paper, the evaluation of weighing instruments' performance is crucial for ensuring accurate measurements in various sectors such as transactions and production. Calibration and verification of weighing results are essential to ensure the instruments operate within their specified parameters. The error of indication, which represents the instrument's performance, must be rigorously evaluated under different conditions. Four different sequences were employed to evaluate the performance of weighing instruments. Sequence (i) utilized a separate step procedure with unloading between each step, leading to the fewest errors, with relative error values ranging from 0.3 to 116 ppm across all study cases. In comparison, sequences (ii), (iii), and (iv) led to relative error values ranging from 1.3 to 365 ppm, 1.3 to 433 ppm, and 0.9 to 283 ppm, respectively. Sequence (ii) involved continuously adding masses according to a predefined sequence without unloading between steps, leading to visible errors and larger uncertainties in calibration results. Sequence (iii) entailed continuously increasing masses in equal steps at fixed intervals, while sequence (iv) involved decreasing masses from maximum to zero without unloading. The results suggest that sequences (ii) and (iii) should be avoided due to the errors they introduce and their larger uncertainties compared to sequence (i). However, sequence (iv) may be suitable for use in specific circumstances. The objective of the research is to explore alternative procedures that can enhance the performance testing of weighing scales by reducing the cost, effort, and complexity associated with the traditional method.