Over the past decade, the zebrafish is increasingly being used as a model to screen for chemical-mediated toxicities including developmental toxicity (DT) and neurotoxicity (NT). One of the major challenges is lack of harmonization in data analysis approaches, thereby posing difficulty in comparing findings across laboratories. To address this, we sought to establish a unified data analysis strategy for both DT and NT data, by adopting the benchmark concentration (BMC) analysis. There are two critical aspects in the BMC analysis: having a toxicity endpoint amenable for BMC and selecting a proper benchmark response (BMR) for the endpoint. For the former, in addition to the typical endpoints in NT assay (e.g., hyper/hypo- response quantified by distance moved), we also used endpoints that assess the differences in movement patterns between chemical-treated embryos and control embryos. For the latter, we standardized the selection of BMR, which is analogous to minimum activity threshold, based on intrinsic response variations in the endpoint. When comparing our BMC results with a traditionally used LOAEL method (Lowest-Observed-Adverse-Effect Level), we found high active compound concordance (100% for DT vs 74% for NT); generally, the BMC was more sensitive than LOAEL (# of BMC more sensitive/# of concordant active compounds, 43/50 for DT vs 16/26 for NT). Using the BMC with standardized toxicity endpoints and an appropriate BMR, we may now have a unified data-analysis approach to comparing results across different zebrafish datasets, for a better understanding of strengths and challenges when using the zebrafish as a screening tool.