OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost-effectiveness of ranibizumab compared to verteporfin in photodynamic therapy (vPDT) for the treatment of myopic choroidal neovascularization (mCNV) from the Canadian healthcare and societal perspectives. METHODS: A Markov model was used to follow a cohort of 55-year old patients with mCNV over a lifetime horizon. The model included 8 health states based on best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and an absorbing death state. Patients were allowed to remain in their current health state, or transition to other health states or death every 3 months. Results from the RADIANCE trial were used to inform the first year transitions for patients receiving ranibizumab, and the first 3 months for those on vPDT. The VIP trial was used to estimate month 4-12 transitions for vPDT. Patients transitioned according to natural progression from year 2 onwards. Health state utilities were derived from a Canadian utility study and published sources. Resource use and costs were collected from clinical trials, published literature, expert opinion, and standard Canadian sources. RESULTS: From the healthcare perspective, patients receiving ranibizumab for mCNV incurred less healthcare costs compared to those on vPDT (cost savings of $3,939). This was achieved while accruing an additional 0.07 life years (LYs) and 0.37 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Thus ranibizumab dominated vPDT. Similar findings were observed from the societal perspective (cost saving of $14,217). The average BCVA score remained consistently higher with ranibizumab compared to vPDT over the entire time horizon. CONCLUSIONS: From a cost-effectiveness standpoint, ranibizumab dominated vPDT in the treatment of mCNV, from both Canadian healthcare and societal perspectives. Patients on ranibizumab realized more QALYs and LYs at a lower cost compared to vPDT.