Thanks for submitting this interesting work to HESS. We received four reviews for this manuscript (this was the result of some late reviews, which were replaced by others, but then came in after all). All four reviews were, in general, positive and your responses in the discussion phase indicate that you will be able to utilize to further improve and clarify your manuscript. I am looking forward to a revised version of the manuscript.

Best regards,
Jan Seibert

thanks for your revised version. As far as I could see a document listing all your responses and changes was missing. Please note that while this information to some degree is already given in the interactive discussion, for an editor it is helpful to get one document and also information where exactly things have been changed (page/line) rather than the discussion-phase 'will be changed'.

Looking through your responses in the discussion phase, I have the following minor comments:

Reviewer 2: Your motivation for using a daily time step could be included in the text

Reviewer 3: Please reconsider addressing the first comment. I agree with the reviewer that discussing seasons where temperature obviously has much less of an effect could be distracting.

Reviewer 4: CRPS and the subscript version, I agree with the reviewer’s concern and would suggest to more clearly state that these refer to the same thing

Best regards,
Jan Seibert

Thanks for your efforts with the revisions. I find the manuscript now in shape for publication but would ask you for some minor corrections/clarifications:
Clarify how the mean NSE, p5l26 has been computed. For how many catchments? Related to this, it would also be useful to mention that there probably is quite some parameter uncertainty and that, thus, using multiple parameter sets might be useful, even if this has not been done here for computational reasons.
Check your references, e.g., bergström instead of Bergstrom
Please check the language once more. Not being a native speaker myself, I will not try to give advice, but at some places the English could be improved, I think.

Best regards,
Jan Seibert