Background: This study aimed to assess the factorial validity and reliability of the Pandemic Coping Scale, a new brief measure of coping behavior in response to the stressors of a pandemic. Methods: The scale was administered to N = 2,316 German participants during the COVID-19 pandemic. An exploratory and a confirmatory factor analysis were applied among two random splits of the sample. The global goodness of fit (χ², RMSEA, SRMR, CFI, TLI), the local goodness of fit (factor loadings, communalities, factor reliability, discriminant validity), and test quality criteria (internal consistency, item discrimination, and difficulty) were evaluated for two models (Model 1: four-factor model; Model 2: four-factor model combined with a second-order general factor). Results: The exploratory factor analysis suggested a four-factor solution with factor loadings accounting for 44.6% of the total variance (Factor 1 ‘Healthy Lifestyle’, Factor 2 ‘Joyful Activities’, Factor 3 ‘Daily Structure’, Factor 4 ‘Prevention Adherence’). The confirmatory factor analysis showed a sufficient global fit for both specified models (Model 1: χ² (59, N =1172) = 366.97, p < .001, RMSEA = .067, SRMR = .043, CFI = .926, TLI = .902; Model 2: χ² (61, N = 1172) = 373.33, p < .001, RMSEA = .066, SRMR = .043, CFI = .925, TLI = .904). Model 1 and Model 2 did not significantly differ in their fit to the data (∆χ² (2, N = 1172) = 6.36, p = .042). Local goodness of fit indices were similar for both models and mostly showed moderate to large factor loadings, and good factor reliabilities except for ‘Prevention Adherence’. Conclusion: The Pandemic Coping Scale showed sufficient factorial validity for the four measured dimensions of coping and reliability for the scales except for ‘Prevention Adherence’ to assess coping during the current COVID-19 pandemic. The ‘Prevention Adherence’ subscale might be improved by adding items with higher item difficulties.