Different models have been described in the literature to evaluate the total porosity of CEC columns: gravimetric, flow as well as conductivity-based methods. In this study, these models have been compared for two kinds of CEC columns: two mixed-mode silica particle stationary phases and different monolithic columns (acrylate or polystyrene divinylbenzene-based). The total porosities measured from the conductivity-based methods were lower than the total column porosities obtained by gravimetric or flow methods for all the investigated columns while the wide distribution of observed values shows that conductivity-based methods discriminate columns more efficiently with very different properties. We propose a conductivity-based method taking into account the actual length proposed by Horvath, to evaluate what we call an "actual electrokinetic" porosity (AEP). This parameter, based on electrokinetic theory only, affords the most consistent evaluation of porosity under experimental CEC conditions for the packed- and acrylate-based monolithic columns. To illustrate the potential of AEP and actual EOF for the estimation of the performances of a CEC system (stationary and mobile phases) we studied the influence of the mobile-phase composition on these parameters for CEC separations with an ammonium embedded packed stationary phase. The AEP and the actual electroosmotic mobility should allow a better understanding of the perfusive EOF and stationary-phase wettability. For neutral compounds (substituted phenols), AEP evaluation allowed us to predict the mobile-phase conditions able to enhance the efficiency while both AEP and actual EOF had to be considered in the case of peptide analysis.