Endoscopic self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement has been used as an alternative or bridge to surgery for malignant colorectal obstruction. Covered SEMS is allegedly associated with high risk of migration. In an effort to reduce this risk, various new type stents have been developed. However, comparative outcomes of these stents have not been fully evaluated. We aimed to compare the efficacy and complication rates between flare covered stent (Flare) and double-layered covered stent (COMVI). We performed a prospective, randomized, open-label study from 4 tertiary referral centers in Korea. Between July 2016 and August 2017, patients with malignant colorectal obstruction were eligible for the study. Flare has a wider opening in the proximal end of stent whereas COMVI has an outer uncovered membrane in the center of stent to avoid migration. Primary outcome measure was migration rate within 1 month. Rates of technical success, clinical success and complications for 1 month such as perforation were also assessed. A total of 55 patients were included. Flare type stents were applied to 26 patients and 29 patients were received COMVI type stents (median age 73.0 [63.0-81.0], male 43.6%). The technical and clinical success rates of Flare and COMVI stent were 88.5% vs. 96.6% (p=0.526) and 88.5% vs. 82.1% (p=0.787), respectively. Although migration rate of COMVI for 1 month seemed to be higher than flare type, there was no statistical significance (17.9% vs. 7.7%, p=0.48). Median migration days after stent insertion of Flare and COMVI were 11.5 ± 9.2 and 10.4 ± 11.8, respectively (p=0.912). Overall complications including perforation andmigration for 1 month suggested no significant difference between Flare and COMVI stent (15.4% vs. 28.6%, p=0.403). Our study presents that both Flare and COMVI type stents are equally effective modalities for treating malignant colorectal obstruction, having similarity in clinical outcomes and complication rates. Stent migration appeared to be lower in Flare than COMVI type.