Conventional static load tests can be complemented with instrumentation, such as strain gauges and tell-tale displacements, to calculate the geotechnical resistance distribution along an embedded pile’s length in skin friction and end bearing. Measured strains are typically multiplied with the theoretical area and Elastic Modulus (i.e., EA, the axial rigidity) to calculate internal forces and ultimately the geotechnical resistance distribution. However, for bored piles/drilled shafts, the pile area may not be uniform, and the elastic modulus of concrete is strain dependent. Hence, the use of empirical formulae or the use of above-grade strain gauges for elastic modulus estimation may lead to erroneous load transfer estimation. A more-direct method to estimate force transfer distribution is the use of the Tangent Modulus method, as proposed by Fellenius (2001), which eliminates some of the limitations in the estimation of Elastic Modulus, yet still requires a reasonable estimation of the cross-sectional area at each strain gauge location. This limitation can be improved if Axial Rigidity (EA) is estimated and used directly in the calculation of force transfer distribution, defined as the Incremental Rigidity method. This paper reviews the various methods available for estimating the internal force distribution from instrumented static load tests and presents case studies comparing estimated load transfer distribution with different methods.