Observational balance tests (e.g., Berg Balance Scale) are used to evaluate fall-risk. However, they tend to be subjective, and their reliability and sensitivity can be limited. The use of in-lab equipment for objective balance evaluation has not been common in clinical practice, due to the requirement of an equipped lab space. While inertial measurement units (IMUs) enable objective out-of-lab balance assessment, their accuracy has not been validated. This study aims to investigate the accuracy of IMUs against in-lab equipment for characterizing standing balance. Ten non-disabled individuals participated in a two-minute standing test on a force-plate. Four approaches were used for estimating inter-segmental moments and center of pressure (COP) position in a four-segment model: (1) camera-based bottom-up approach; (2) camera-based top-down approach; (3) IMU-based (accelerometer) top-down approach; and (4) IMU-based (accelerometer and gyroscope) top-down approach. Approaches 2 to 4 resulted in high accuracy compared to the reference, Approach 1. The root-mean-square errors in estimating the segments' orientation, ground reaction forces, COP position, and joint moments were smaller than 0.3°, 0.2 N/kg, 1.5 mm, and 0.016N·m/kg, respectively. Since no significant differences were observed between the accuracy of Approaches 3 and 4, only accelerometer recordings are needed and could be recommended for monitoring standing balance.