Rabbit antithymocyte immunoglobulin (r-ATG) and basiliximab are used as induction treatment for renal transplant patients. Since the cost associated with these procedures is a limiting factor in their availability, it is necessary to determine the cost-effectiveness ratio, given the differences in clinical outcomes among them. OBJECTIVES: To determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio between r-ATG and basiliximab for defined clinical outcomes in patients undergoing induction treatment for renal transplantation.   METHODS: We completed meta-analyses for r-ATG and basiliximab in induction treatment. The data was used to define global effectiveness outcome measures (i.e. relative risk-RR) necessary to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis for Colombia. The attributable risk was calculated using the RR for each clinical outcome.  RESULTS: The quadrant analysis for the cost-effectiveness ratio showed that the simulations are in the first quadrant (I), except for the fatal outcome of high-risk patients located in quadrant IV. For every other outcome and analysis group, there was an increase in effectiveness and cost. The costs of reducing 1% the attributable risk for each outcome (incremental cost-effectiveness) using r-ATG vs. basiliximab were: acute allograft rejection USD$5,4 (standard-risk) - $8,7 (high-risk); delayed graft function for high-risk patients USD$57,4; graft failure USD$20 (standard-risk)-$31 (high-risk); death USD$19,9 (standard-risk) -$39,1 (high-risk).  CONCLUSIONS: The results of the comparative analysis of r-ATG vs. basiliximab in induction of renal transplant patients showed that r-ATG is a cost-effective alternative for a significant proportion of the population for the examined outcomes in Colombia. The investment necessary to reduce the risk of the considered outcomes can be low considering its benefits, especially in a context where the availability of donors is limited.