Serological tests are important tools helping to determine previous infection with severe acute respiratory disease coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and to monitor immune responses. The current tests are based on spike (S), the receptor binding domain (RBD), or the nucleoprotein (NP) as substrate. Here, we used samples from a high seroprevalence cohort of health care workers (HCWs) to perform a longitudinal analysis of the antibody responses using three distinct serological assays. 501 serum samples were tested using: a) a research-grade RBD and spike based tandem enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (MS-RBD ELISA, MS-spike ELISA), b) a commercial RBD and spike based tandem ELISA (Kantaro-RBD, -spike), and c) a commercial NP-based chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA, Abbott Architect). Seroprevalence ranged around 28% during the early stage of the pandemic (a: 28.4% positives; b: 28.1%; c: 27.3%). Good correlation was observed between the MS and Kantaro RBD ELISAs and between the MS and Kantaro spike ELISAs. By contrast, modest correlations were observed between the Abbott Architect and both RBD and spike-based assays. A proportion of HCWs (n=178) were sampled again 3-5 months after the first time point. Although antibody levels declined in most of the positive individuals, the overall seroprevalence measured by RBD-spike based assays remained unchanged. However the seroprevalence of NP-reactive antibodies significantly declined. Lastly, we tested six samples of individuals who received two doses of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine and found that seroconversion was detected by the RBD-spike assays but - of course as expected - not the NP based assay. In summary, our results consolidate the strength of different serological assays to assess the magnitude and duration of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2.