AbstractA comparative discussion of constitutive rate equations generated by using the hypoelasticity and plasticity theories is presented. If is shown that these two approaches are equivalent for the loading process but differ essentially in defining the unloading (or reverse loading) paths. The multisurface plasticity formulation proves to be more convenient in incorporating memory rules of particular loading events, whereas loading‐unloading criteria used in hypoelasticity may result in an unrealistic prediction of material response for some loading paths, and in particular, for cyclic loading. The violation of the continuity condition between loading–unloading domains in proposed constitutive relations3,4limits their applicability to some particular classes of loading pa