Is this still a tentative ID based on appearance? I think that the Fascicle images of Macaria andersoni, now a synonym of Macaria occiduaria, might be a better match. Both species are in Wisconsin though I'm not sure occiduaria ranges as far south as Dane Co. so I guess I'd lean toward evagaria.

Yes, this is just a tentative ID based on appearance. I looked at the photos of Macaria occiduaria on MPG and they show much darker markings across the wings of the moths. Also interesting to find out that Macaria occiduaria is a synonym of M. andersoni. My moth seemed to most closely resemble although it seems that resemblance is only one part of identification.

Just to be clear, andersoni Swett, 1916 is the junior synonym, not occiduaria Packard, 1874, (n. syn. in Pohl et al. (2010), ZooKeys, 38: 499). The way you phrased it gives me the impression that you might have it reversed. According to the MONA Fascicle, the two are structurally identical with identical genitalia. They were kept separate in the MONA Fascicle based on host.

I will add your example to evagaria at MPG when I get a chance since that species seem more likely based on location. Yours appears to be a male. If you find it again, size might help as evagaria males are larger than typical "andersoni" males. Females of evagaria are much smaller than males and are much better marked than females of occiduaria/andersoni.

Thanks for clearing up my misconception about the names. This is one of those moths that seems show up only occasionally judging by the date of this photo but I will watch for it.

I had posted a copy of the moth on BAMONA (Butterflies and Moths of North America) but the ID given was just tentative. No DNA analysis. At any rate it certainly looks like a Speranza. The species is not really certain.