There is increasing pressure for medical care reimbursement to be linked to outcomes. New medications approved for glaucoma, age-related macular degeneration (AMD), and dry eye disease may offer improved outcomes, but they have higher acquisition costs. This article reviews published pharmacoeconomic studies assessing the incremental change in outcomes achieved vs. the increased medication costs incurred. The different types of pharmacoeconomic evaluations are described. Identified pharmacoeconimic evaluations range from simple cost-consequence statements to more complex cost-utility analyses conducted across many healthcare systems. Notably missing in all analyses are the effects of improved treatment on patient productivity. Although the diversity and small number of studies limit conclusions, there is some evidence that the newer glaucoma medications, as a group, produce economic offsets such as reduced glaucoma surgeries and fewer physician visits. Photodynamic therapy for AMD may be cost-effective when used early in patients with better visual acuity allowing cost-offsets over longer periods of time to be considered. The single pharmacoeconomic analysis of topical cyclosporine for dry eye disease was only hypothesis-generating. Comprehensive studies that investigate clinical, economic, and humanistic outcomes for the patient and society are needed to adequately assess the comparative value of current and future ophthalmic medications.