Objectives This analysis seeks to determine whether differences between real and estimated chronological age (CA) with biological age (BA) in skeletal individuals reflect variability in aging. Material and methods A total of 87 individuals of two samples, ranging from 20 to 94 years old, were analyzed. One, partially documented, belongs to a Mexican skeletal collection dating to the 20th century; the other is an assemblage of prehispanic individuals from different archaeological sites. In all specimens, the tooth annulation method (TCA) was applied to estimate CA, while—excluding individuals older than 80 years—auricular surface (AS) and pubic symphysis (PS) methods were used to estimate BA. Statistical analyses were conducted to identify correlations and significance of the differences between CA vs. TCA, CA vs. AS/PS, TCA vs. AS/PS. Sex of individuals was assessed for its influence in aging. Results The use of TCA to estimate CA was successful for most individuals. A strong correlation was found between CA vs. TCA, CA vs. AS/PS, TCA vs. AS/PS and their differences were significant but variation in these were found when assessed by separate age groups. Sex did not influence such differences. Discussion TCA can be used to estimate CA and its differences with BA, being less than 10 years, are similar to those found in living populations. Differences between CA and BA are due to intra‐population variability, which could be the consequence of individual differences in aging. More research is needed to have confidence that under‐ and overestimations of BA are indicators of aging variability at the level of the individual.