OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare symptomatic and anatomic outcomes 1 year after robotic vs abdominal sacrocolpopexy. STUDY DESIGN: Our retrospective cohort study compared women who underwent robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSC) with 1 surgeon to those who underwent abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC) as part of the Colpopexy and Urinary Reduction Efforts trial. Our primary outcome was a composite measure of vaginal bulge symptoms or repeat surgery for prolapse. RESULTS: We studied 447 women (125 with RSC and 322 with ASC). Baseline characteristics were similar. There were no significant differences in surgical failures 1 year after surgery based on our primary composite outcome (7/86 [8%] vs 12/304 [4%]; P = .16). When we considered anatomic failure, there were also no significant differences between RSC and ASC (4/70 [6%] vs 16/289 [6%]; P = .57). CONCLUSION: One year after sacrocolpopexy, women who underwent RSC have similar symptomatic and anatomic success compared with those women who underwent ASC.