The Subjective Vitality Scale (SVS: Ryan & Frederick, 1997) is a 7‐item self‐report instrument to measure one's level of vitality and has been widely used in psychological studies. However, there have been discrepancies in which version of the SVS (7‐ or 6‐item version) employed between as well as within researchers. Moreover, Item 5 seems not be a good indicator of vitality from a content validity perspective. Therefore, the present study aimed to evaluate the validity and reliability of the SVS for Japanese and Singaporeans rigorously by comparing 3 measurement models (5‐, 6‐, and 7‐item models). To this end, the scale was first translated from English to Japanese and then the Japanese and English versions of the scale were administered to Japanese (n = 268) and Singaporean undergraduate students (n = 289), respectively. The factorial and concurrent validity of the three models were examined independently on each of the samples. Furthermore, the covariance stability of the vitality responses was assessed over a 4‐week time period for another independent Japanese sample (n = 140). The findings from this study indicated that from methodological and content validity perspectives, the 5‐item model is considered most preferable for both language versions of the SVS.