OBJECTIVES: Model-based cost-effectiveness analyses on maternal vaccine (MV) and monoclonal antibody (mAb) interventions against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) use context-specific data and produce varied results. Through model comparison, we aim to characterize RSV cost-effectiveness models and examine drivers for their outputs. METHODS: We compared 3 static and 2 dynamic models using a common input parameter set for a hypothetical birth cohort of 100 000 infants. Year-round and seasonal programs were evaluated for MV and mAb interventions, using available evidence during the study period (eg, phase III MV and phase IIb mAb efficacy). RESULTS: Three static models estimated comparable medically attended (MA) cases averted versus no intervention (MV, 1019-1073; mAb, 5075-5487), with the year-round MV directly saving ∼€1 million medical and €0.3 million nonmedical costs, while gaining 4 to 5 discounted quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) annually in <1-year-olds, and mAb resulting in €4 million medical and €1.5 million nonmedical cost savings, and 21 to 25 discounted QALYs gained. In contrast, both dynamic models estimated fewer MA cases averted (MV, 402-752; mAb, 3362-4622); one showed an age shift of RSV cases, whereas the other one reported many non-MA symptomatic cases averted, especially by MV (2014). These differences can be explained by model types, assumptions on non-MA burden, and interventions' effectiveness over time. CONCLUSIONS: Our static and dynamic models produced overall similar hospitalization and death estimates, but also important differences, especially in non-MA cases averted. Despite the small QALY decrement per non-MA case, their larger number makes them influential for the costs per QALY gained of RSV interventions.