Abstract This article notes a lack of communication between two broad schools of scholarship on regional integration: EU studies and analyses of the new regionalism. It is argued that the existence of this divide, which is perpetrated by proponents of both schools, is an impediment to the elaboration of useful theory as well as being a missed opportunity. The benefits and problems of using the EU as a comparator in studies of regionalism are assessed. While the mistake of giving the EU analytical primacy as a benchmark or model is to be avoided, it is argued that careful treatment of accumulated insights from EU studies (including a proper re-inspection of classical integration theory) brings clear methodological and meta-theoretical benefits for the project of comparative regional integration scholarship.