Coping Power (CP) is an empirically supported school-based intervention for children at risk for aggression. A child's social status with peers and the extent to which they accurately perceive it are important aspects of preadolescent social development that may influence how intervention format affects disruptive behavior outcomes. Further, reactive (RA) and proactive (PA) functional subtypes of aggression have differential relations with peer acceptance. This study is the first to test whether the effects of group (GCP) and individual (ICP) format of CP on RA and PA differed based on children's actual social status (aim 1) and whether they over- or underestimated their acceptance relative to their actual social status (perceptual accuracy; aim 2). This study involved secondary data analyses using a large-scale randomized controlled trial that assigned 360 children ages 9 to 11 (M = 9.74, SD = 0.62), predominantly male (n = 234, 65%), and Black (n = 273, 75.8%), with elevated levels of aggression to either ICP or GCP condition. Polynomial regression analyses and three-dimensional response surface plots tested and probed significant (p < 0.05) interactions between either actual acceptance or perceptual accuracy and intervention format on postintervention reactive and proactive aggression. Actual acceptance moderated the effects of GCP on RA, such that those with higher acceptance showed smaller reductions in RA from either preintervention or postintervention to follow-up. Perceptual accuracy also moderated the effects of ICP on PA, with those underestimating their acceptance showing smaller decreases in PA from postintervention to follow-up. These findings provide valuable insights into how children's actual peer acceptance and perceptual accuracy influence CP outcomes for different functional subtypes of aggression based on intervention format, raising important questions about potential mechanisms.