OBJECTIVES:  Metal ceramic (MC) crowns have been considered the gold standard for the repair of damaged teeth. However, the esthetic of MC crowns is limited by the metal framework and the layer of opaque porcelain needed for masking the underlying metal grayish shade. All-ceramic crowns have been used over the last four decades as an alternative for MC crowns to overcome their esthetic limitations. Although, the price of all-ceramic crowns is much higher. Policy makers require information on the relative benefits and costs associated with different types of crown materials in order to support reimbursement decisions. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-benefit ratio of dental metal ceramic and all-ceramic crowns. METHODS: three hundred ninety four patients participated in the study. They were included into two treatment groups and were followed up for two years and three months at Lviv National Medical University. People were selected among the patients who only needed crown restorations. Direct and indirect costs of the treatments were payed out of the pocket by patients.RESULTS: Total costs for the group (#1) with metal ceramic crowns were 21630$ and for the group (#2) with all-ceramic crowns were 26700$. The analyses yields a cost-benefit ratio of 291,8 for group #1 and 168,1 for the group #2. CONCLUSIONS:  Metal ceramic crowns provide a positive cost-benefit ratio compared with the all-ceramic crowns. Metal ceramic dental restorations fulfill the treatment needs and continue to be the widely recommended treatment for the patients with extensively decayed teeth.