Medellin and New Orleans were regularly presented as resilience flagships of the Rockefeller's 100 Resilient Cities (100RC) program. In this article, I will demonstrate how 100RC was embedded or abandoned in both cities' policies. The two case studies provide an opportunity to understand how the 100RC approach to resilience offered – or failed to offer – an appropriate space for the multiple deployments of resilience. 100RC initially promoted an integrative definition of resilience, aiming to address natural as well as social stresses and shocks. I argue that this holistic approach paradoxically contributed to limiting the multiplicity of resilience in both cities. In Medellin, the project came to a halt after political changes. New Orleans eventually developed a more reductionist and technical approach than that initially formulated, focusing on the effectiveness of infrastructures rather than social changes. Considering the importance of contextualizing resilience to local concerns, this analysis will thus demonstrate some of the challenges implied in the institutionalization of a global model of resilience. Moreover, it will also highlight the importance of contextualizing neoliberalism and question the widespread vision of resilient cities as being merely neoliberal.