Introduction & Objective: Submucosal hemorrhoidectomy is one the accepted techniques of surgery but it has never been a popular operation. The advantage of this surgical method is that it minimizes the injury to anoderm and mucosa of anus. The aim of this study was to compare between submucosal hemorrhoidectomy and Ferguson hemorrhoidectomy.Materials & Methods: In a clinical double-blind controlled trial, 60 patients with grade 3 and 4 hemorrhoids were randomly divided into two groups: 1) submucosal hemorrhoidectomy (30 patients) and 2) Ferguson hemorrhoidectomy (30 patients). These patients were evaluated for early and delayed post operative complications such as pain, bleeding, urinary retention, constipation, fecal impaction, incontinency, surgical site infection, fissure, skin tag, mucosal ectropion, anal stenosis and recurrence. They were regularly followed up at 24 hours, 1 week, 3 months and 6 months after their operation.Results: There were no statistically significant differences between two these groups in terms of age, gender and grade of hemorrhoid(s). Patients treated with submucosal hemorrhoidectomy has significantly less pain within 24 hours after the surgery (P=0.026), but there was no statistically differences between two groups in anal stenosis and other complications.Conclusions: Submucosal hemorrhoidectomy is an effective method in reducing post operative pain within the 24 hours after the surgery and was no case of complicated anal stenosis after 6 months follow up. Other complications in the submucosal technique were similar to those of Ferguson. Submucosal hemorrhoidectomy is comparable with Ferguson technique as a suitable procedure for high grade prolapsed hemorrhoids.