This study evaluated the prediction error (PE) variance and absolute median PE of different IOL calculation formulae including last generation formulae such as Barrett True-K with K, Okulix and Total Keratometry (TK) based calculations with Haigis and Barrett True-K in a simulation model in post-SMILE eyes. Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Marburg, Germany. Design: Prospective study. Preoperative measurements included IOL power calculation before and after SMILE surgery. The target refraction was set to be the lowest myopic refractive error in pre-SMILE eyes. The IOL power targeting at the lowest myopic refractive error in pre-SMILE eyes was selected for the post-SMILE IOL calculation of the same eye. The difference between the predicted refraction of pre- and post-SMILE eyes with the same IOL power was defined as IOL-Difference (IOL-Diff). The refractive change induced by SMILE was defined as the difference between preoperative and postoperative manifest refraction (SMILE-Diff). 98 eyes from 49 patients underwent bilateral myopic SMILE. The PE variance of Okulix was not significantly different compared to Barrett True-K with TK (P=0.471). The standard deviation (SD) of the mean PEs were ±0.413 D (Haigis-TK), ±0.453 D (Okulix), ±0.471 D (Barrett True-K with TK), ±0.556 D (Haigis-L) and ±0.576 D (Barrett True-K with K). The mean absolute PE were 0.340 D, 0.353 D, 0.404 D, 0.511 D and 0.715 D for Haigis-TK, Okulix, Barrett True-K with TK, Barrett True-K with K and Haigis-L respectively. The highest percentage of eyes within ± 0.50 D was achieved by Okulix followed by Haigis TK, Barrett True-K with TK, Barrett True-K with K and Haigis-L. Our results suggest that Haigis in combination with TK, Okulix and Barrett True-K with and without TK offer good options for accurate IOL power calculation after SMILE. Haigis-L showed a tendency for myopic shift in eyes after previous SMILE.