Lab-reared organisms allow researchers to understand aspects of our natural environment under controlled conditions contributing knowledge to policy development, risk assessment, and environmental systems. However, it is important to consider whether lab-reared organisms are actually representative models for their wild counterparts. To address this, our study compared the toxicity of ultraviolet filters (UVFs) between lab-reared and wild-caught Daphnia pulex to understand the effect of life-history on environmental exposures. 48-hour exposures of daphnids to avobenzone, oxybenzone, or octocrylene found minimal differences in both lethal and sublethal acute toxicity; however, several large deviations in chronic toxicity were observed over 21 day exposures. Wild daphnids exposed to 100 μg/L of octocrylene exhibited a 53% reduction in total reproduction compared to lab daphnids, as well as a 16% smaller core body size. In addition, differences in mortality were apparent between each population, as lab Daphnia experienced 30% higher mortality to 100 µg/L oxybenzone, while wild Daphnia experienced 30% higher mortality to 100 µg/L octocrylene. Overall, these results highlight a clear difference between the tolerance of lab-reared and wild organisms to UVFs, and that these differences are chemical specific. These results highlight the need for more environmentally relevant test methods for the use of model organisms across a multitude of fields, including physiology and toxicology. While the practicality and accessibility of lab-reared model organisms is an important tool, it is worth considering the use of their wild counterparts to provide a more accurate picture of these organismal functions in nature.