Objetives. To compare in terms of cost-effectiveness to entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir (TDF) in the treatment of hepatitis B virus (HBV) in public hospitals in Peru. Materials and methods. We structured a Markov model. We define effectiveness adjusted life years for quality (QALY). We include the direct costs of treatment in soles from the perspective of the Ministry of Health of Peru. We estimate the relationship between cost and effectiveness ratios (ICER). We performed sensitivity analyzes considering a range of willingness to pay (WTP) from one to three times the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita, and a tornado analysis regarding Monetary Net Profit (BMN) or ICER. Results. Treatment with TDF is more effective and less expensive than ETV. The ETV had a cost per QALY of PEN 4482, and PEN 1526 TDF. The PTO maintains a progressively larger with increasing WTP BMN. The discount rate was the only variable with a significant effect on model uncertainty. Conclusion: Treatment with TDF is more cost-effective than ETV in public hospitals in Peru.