BACKGROUND: Cognitive status evaluation is not routine in the acute stroke setting and there is no consensus on which neuropsychological tool is more feasible and informative. The aim of this pilot study was to compare the feasibility and acceptability of two brief cognitive tests, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and the Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS), in acute stroke, with a focus on patients' experience, administration time, and the cognitive data obtained. METHODS: Patients with a diagnosis of ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke or of transient ischemic attack admitted to two stroke units were included. The sample consisted of 34 participants (mean age ±SD 71.1 ± 16.1 years, 25 males). Within five days of onset, patients were evaluated by means of the MoCA and OCS by a trained neuropsychologist. RESULTS: Both tests were feasible in the stroke unit setting and had a high level of acceptability by patients. MoCA test was fully completed by 25 patients, OCS by 21 patients. The OCS administration time was longer than that of the MoCA. However, OCS was perceived less demanding than MoCA by patients. Twenty patients completed both the MoCA and the OCS entirely, and only 2 of them did not show any impairment in both tests. Seventeen patients showed at least an impaired domain on the OCS and 15 patients presented with a MoCA global score below cut-off for cognitive impairment. CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary study did not show a superiority of the OCS over the widely used MoCA, and suggests the need for further validation in larger samples of stroke patients, exploring tests accuracy in detecting cognitive post-stroke impairment.