Accurate thermochemical data of SixHy and SixFy series is a prerequisite for high‐end materials design. In this study, the standard enthalpies of formation (∆fHnormalθ) of SixHy and SixFy were calculated from atomization and isodesmic reactions using the composite methods CBS‐QB3, G3, G4, W1U, W1BD, and W2‐F12. Second, their temperature‐dependent thermochemical parameters (∆𝑓𝑆θ and Cp) are derived from the optimized geometries and frequency calculation at B3LYP/cc‐pV(T + d)Z level. In addition, this paper uses nonexpert‐user methods (CBS‐QB3, G3, G4, W1U and W1BD) to compare the calculated ∆fHnormalθ with recommended values of Active Thermochemical Table, Burcat database, and W2‐F12 calculation results. The accuracy of these nonexpert‐user methods are interpreted in terms of descriptive statistics. The results show that: (1) the accuracy rank of individual compound methods is as follows: CBS‐QB3 > W1BD > W1U > G4 > G3; (2) for Si/H/F compounds, three combination methods, CBS‐QB3/G4/W1U or CBS‐QB3/G4/W1BD, and two combination methods, G4/W1U or G4/W1BD, were quite powerful, and the weighted results could reproduce the recommended values within “near‐chemical‐accuracy,” (3) the popular W1BD and W1U methods give highly erroneous results, indicating that one should not apply these methods in isolation unless other error‐cancellation strategies are collocated indicated.