The aim of this study was to examine the interrater reliability (trained vs. untrained raters) and criterion-related validity (manual vs. automatic timing) of the 4 × 10-m shuttle run and 30-m running speed tests (times measured). The study comprised 85 adolescents (38 girls) aged 13.0-16.9 years from the Healthy Lifestyle in Europe by Nutrition in Adolescence study. The time required to complete the 4 × 10-m shuttle run and 30-m running tests was simultaneously measured (a) manually with a stopwatch by both trained and untrained raters (for interrater reliability analysis), and (b) by using photoelectric cells (for validity analysis). Systematic error, random error, and heteroscedasticity were studied with repeated-measured analysis of variance and Bland-Altman plots. The systematic error for untrained vs. trained raters and the untrained raters vs. photoelectric cells were in all cases ∼0.1 seconds (p < 0.01), that is, untrained raters recorded higher times. No systematic error was found between trained raters and photoelectric cells (p > 0.05). No heteroscedasticity was shown in any case (p > 0.05). The findings indicate that manual measurements by a trained rater, using a stopwatch, seem to be a valid method to assess speed and agility fitness testing in adolescents. Researchers must be trained to minimize the measurement error.