<h3>BACKGROUND</h3> Indigenous compared with non-Indigenous patients have historically been known to have higher cardiovascular risk. With improved care delivery of acute myocardial infarction, we sought to compare contemporary profiles between indigenous versus non-Indigenous patients presenting with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) to a single PCI cardiac center in Saskatchewan. <h3>METHODS AND RESULTS</h3> We prospectively evaluated consecutive ACS admissions (no exclusion criteria applied) from March 15, 2019 to March 30, 2021 at the Royal University Hospital, Saskatoon. Categorized by self-reported Indigenous and non-Indigenous status, we describe presenting demographics, treatment patterns, unadjusted all-cause mortality and all-cause rehospitalization. Continuous variables are presented as medians (25th, 75th percentiles), categorical values as frequencies (%). Of the 1950 ACS admissions, 260 (13.3%) were Indigenous. Indigenous compared with non-Indigenous patients were younger, more likely female, have a history of heart failure and a significant burden of both traditional and non-traditional cardiovascular risk factors. Both groups were revascularized comparably with PCI. Indigenous compared with non-Indigenous patients were however more likely to present with higher levels of NTproBNP and higher incident rates of cardiogenic shock and/or cardiac arrest, with a greater severity of left ventricular systolic dysfunction (Table 1). While in-hospital mortality is comparable between the two groups, Indigenous compared with non-Indigenous have significantly higher unadjusted 1-year mortality (11.9% vs. 8.0%, p=0.039). <h3>CONCLUSION</h3> Indigenous compared with non-Indigenous patients hospitalized with an acute coronary syndrome have a significantly greater burden of premorbid cardiovascular risk and present with greater clinical acuity. While the in-hospital outcomes are comparable, likely due to established pre-hospital/in-hospital ACS processes of care, the higher one-year mortality suggest that the higher residual risk in Indigenous patients is likely driven by the greater burden of modifiable traditional and non-traditional risk factors in this patient population.